Fedgov vs Apple : In re Iphone "backdoor"

[Valerie]

finally some common sense.. thank you bill gates!




Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates believes Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI.

Gates is the latest powerful tech leader to voice his opinions on the heated security debate that has arisen after Apple announced it wasn't going to assist the FBI hack into an iPhone 5C that belonged to a suspected terrorist.

The Microsoft cofounder told The Financial Times on Monday that Apple should comply with the FBI, dismissing Cook's claims that it will set a wider precedent of law enforcement agencies hacking into citizen's phones.

"This is a specific case where the government is asking for access to information. They are not asking for some general thing, they are asking for a particular case," Gates said.

"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records. Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times.'"

Bill Gates thinks Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI

 

[Contumacious]

finally some common sense.. thank you bill gates!




Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates believes Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI.

Gates is the latest powerful tech leader to voice his opinions on the heated security debate that has arisen after Apple announced it wasn't going to assist the FBI hack into an iPhone 5C that belonged to a suspected terrorist.

The Microsoft cofounder told The Financial Times on Monday that Apple should comply with the FBI, dismissing Cook's claims that it will set a wider precedent of law enforcement agencies hacking into citizen's phones.

"This is a specific case where the government is asking for access to information. They are not asking for some general thing, they are asking for a particular case," Gates said.

"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records. Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times.'"

Bill Gates thinks Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI

And of course, to the government supremacists "common sense" means giving the government an encryption back door.


On August 19th, 2014 , 4 months BEFORE the San Bernardino incident the FBI was seeking an encryption back door. ,

:According to James Corney , The FBI Director:

"The solution, Comey said, is to expand a 1990s-era law to emcompass Internet companies like Google or Apple. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (commonly known as CALEA), currently compels telecommunication companies such as Verizon or AT&T to build systems that can be wiretapped. The law, however, doesn't cover companies like Google, Facebook or Apple."


But as usual the narcotized does not analyze the issues. They side with the government out of fear and/or ignorance.


.

 

[Valerie]

you side with fear out of ignorance and paranoia...

 

[HenryBHough]

I find it interesting that so few who feel their privacy to be of no consequence have included their PINs and Social Security numbers in their signatures.

Say, what IS it that you're hiding?

 

[Contumacious]

The government wants a backdoor - the government bureaucrats believes that they have a right to spy on us now that the fourth amendment is no longer in effect.

Really? Well, good luck finding one.

Back to the subject:
Would there be any problem with Apple voluntarily putting together a one-time software package inside Apple's own plant, using it to unlock this terrorists' phone, handing the govt all the records from the phone, and then destroying the software package so no one could ever modify it or use it on any other phone?

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

Bullshit. Apple is following legal precedent.

In "FBI vs Onstar"

The FBI asked Onstar to modify its in-car information system to be able to eavesdrop on conversations inside the vehicle.

Onstar argued that modifying its product in such a way would render the device inoperable. So the Court of Appeals in the Ninth District agreed with the company that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."

In re Application of the United States, 349 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 11/18/2003)


Furthermore, I have asked you and your ilk to provide EVIDENCE that the San Bernardino Jihad is NOT a false flag operation , and you have been unable to do so.

 

[Contumacious]

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. said Thursday that 175 Apple devices are sitting in his cybercrime lab right now that investigators can't access because of encryption.

The narcotized government supremacists will argue that Apple and other companies must be conscripted to aid "law" enforcement.


.

 

[kaz]

Really? Well, good luck finding one.

Back to the subject:
Would there be any problem with Apple voluntarily putting together a one-time software package inside Apple's own plant, using it to unlock this terrorists' phone, handing the govt all the records from the phone, and then destroying the software package so no one could ever modify it or use it on any other phone?

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

Bullshit. Apple is following legal precedent.

In "FBI vs Onstar"

The FBI asked Onstar to modify its in-car information system to be able to eavesdrop on conversations inside the vehicle.

Onstar argued that modifying its product in such a way would render the device inoperable. So the Court of Appeals in the Ninth District agreed with the company that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."

In re Application of the United States, 349 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 11/18/2003)


Furthermore, I have asked you and your ilk to provide EVIDENCE that the San Bernardino Jihad is NOT a false flag operation , and you have been unable to do so.

Finally, the first one who's half way there. you admitted the battle you are fighting, now admit the second half, you're fighting the wrong battle in this case.

I agree with you totally that the idea that companies like Apple and Onstar should not be forced by government to build in back doors to provide government with access to their customer's conversations on demand.

The problem is you're fighting it with the wrong case. Apple decided on their own to go ahead and do it. With Public/Private key encryption available to remove their ability to decrypt, they built in a back door anyway. That was a choice they made,, they need to give the data available to solve the murders.

The solution is to remove the back door. But to argue what you are arguing is arguing the right point with the wrong case

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

finally some common sense.. thank you bill gates!




Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates believes Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI.

Gates is the latest powerful tech leader to voice his opinions on the heated security debate that has arisen after Apple announced it wasn't going to assist the FBI hack into an iPhone 5C that belonged to a suspected terrorist.

The Microsoft cofounder told The Financial Times on Monday that Apple should comply with the FBI, dismissing Cook's claims that it will set a wider precedent of law enforcement agencies hacking into citizen's phones.

"This is a specific case where the government is asking for access to information. They are not asking for some general thing, they are asking for a particular case," Gates said.

"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at bank records. Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times.'"

Bill Gates thinks Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI

Good. Let Bill Gates open the damn thing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Constitution wasn't a suicide pact

That cliche does not apply in these proceedings in any way shape or form

1) Congress has NO authority to meddle in the internal affairs of other nations, specifically, it has no authority to created "terrorists", actually avengers

2- You have no idea what happened in San Bernardino ; the incident occurred in a government building , lots of police cruises with dashcams yet they have failed or refused to share any videos with the populace - that in my book is fucked up - they are concealing something

3- the executive branch has no authority to concoct scam simply because they don't like encryption - the motherfuckers actually believe that they have authority to spy on us ; since we are now a banana republic I'm certain the government will destroy Apple -- but I'm also certain that the blackmarket will compensate by creating encryption not subject to any government's jurisdiction


.

They can't just compel you. They have to go to court and get a warrant or you have to agree to do it for them. In this case they aren't even doing it without a warrant, they have one. And with good reason. Going into a room and shooting a bunch of people is clearly "probable cause"


Apple isn't protecting anyone. No one but bad guys would be upset they helped the police investigate a mass shooting At this point everyone including the bad guys know they can tap the phone This is a case of zero benefit, they are just helping terrorists murder people and the people who help them get away with it

They cant compel you period. What makes you think that the government should have the right to compel you to perform work for them?

A warrant has nothing to do with compulsion - it has to do with suspending your rights against searches.

Finally, where have I made any statement that Apple is protecting anything other than perhaps their own bottom line. It really is not a matter of weather or not you agree with Apple's position. It really has to do with weather or not you think the government should have the power to force you to produce a product for them or force you to serve them in whatever endeavor they may dream up for you.

If you believe in freedom then the answer is crystal clear - no the do not. If you are a totalitarian then sure, why not allow with government to come into your home and demand that you search your neighbors hose - they are the government after all.

So if I agree with the fourth amendment, I'm against freedom, got it. This message has been brought to you by the anarchists are as big a crack pots as liberals are organization.

If you guys want to hold hands and jump off a cliff together, be my guest. Sure, the warrant isn't being served on Apple, Apple just needs to do limited work within the capabilities of it's organization to help them get it.

I hope they start arresting Apple executives until they get it. And Apple is the scum of the earth for doing actions that accomplish nothing but the death of more innocent people

What Apple is doing is protecting their products and customers. What the government is doing is trying to force Apple to compromise their products and customers which are the American people.

protecting them from what? getting killed by terrorists? Or if they are terrorists getting caught?

I'd grant your point if Apple's contention was they cannot decrypt the data. Then that would be a point to a lot of people that want to transmit all sorts of sensitive information.

But now we all know Apple can decrypt So seriously, who is protected by them not going ahead and doing it? You're not going to buy their phones becasue they helped the San Bernardino investigation determine if anyone else is involved? If you have sensitive information you don't want to be transmitted, the horse is out of the barn. you know they can and now it's just a matter of process if they do it or not

Apple does have the ability to build something to get into that phone, but according to Apple, that would put all I-phone users at risk for hacking or worse, the government looking into our phones somehow.

The government (and government cheerleaders) claim differently. So it's all a matter on who's information you trust. I'll trust Apple over our government any day of the week. As of yet, I haven't heard any evidence there is anything on that phone anyway. Apple may spend thousands, tens of thousands, or whatever it takes to build this process for the FBI, and they are liable to find nothing of any value.

Personally I don't think this terrorist thing has anything to do with it. I think it's just an excuse to get into this phone so perhaps the FBI can learn something they always wanted to know. They feel helpless and shut out that there is a device beyond their ability to investigate anytime or anywhere.

It just smells of all kinds of nefarious things.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The government wants a backdoor - the government bureaucrats believes that they have a right to spy on us now that the fourth amendment is no longer in effect.

Really? Well, good luck finding one.

Back to the subject:
Would there be any problem with Apple voluntarily putting together a one-time software package inside Apple's own plant, using it to unlock this terrorists' phone, handing the govt all the records from the phone, and then destroying the software package so no one could ever modify it or use it on any other phone?

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

I don't see this as a left or right issue. It's not divided down party lines. I'm as right as you can just about get, and I'm against government forcing a private industry to create items they demand.

 

[Contumacious]

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

Bullshit. Apple is following legal precedent.

In "FBI vs Onstar"

The FBI asked Onstar to modify its in-car information system to be able to eavesdrop on conversations inside the vehicle.

Onstar argued that modifying its product in such a way would render the device inoperable. So the Court of Appeals in the Ninth District agreed with the company that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."

In re Application of the United States, 349 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 11/18/2003)


Furthermore, I have asked you and your ilk to provide EVIDENCE that the San Bernardino Jihad is NOT a false flag operation , and you have been unable to do so.

Finally, the first one who's half way there. you admitted the battle you are fighting, now admit the second half, you're fighting the wrong battle in this case.

I agree with you totally that the idea that companies like Apple and Onstar should not be forced by government to build in back doors to provide government with access to their customer's conversations on demand.

The problem is you're fighting it with the wrong case. Apple decided on their own to go ahead and do it. With Public/Private key encryption available to remove their ability to decrypt, they built in a back door anyway. That was a choice they made,, they need to give the data available to solve the murders.

The solution is to remove the back door. But to argue what you are arguing is arguing the right point with the wrong case

Apple faces at least 12 other All Writs Act orders to force it to unlock more iPhones

 

[PK1]

finally some common sense.. thank you bill gates!

Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates believes Apple should help unlock an iPhone for the FBI.
/QUOTE]
---
Microsoft has never been big on consumer security/privacy.
Only as a reactive gesture, they introduced security features into their Windows OS.
And now with Windows 10, they are pissing again on consumer privacy preferences.

Gates vs Cook?
Cook wins hands down.
.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Apple needs to comply with a lawful court order, as it has in the past.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

you side with fear out of ignorance and paranoia...

It's the libertarian way.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“The Microsoft cofounder told The Financial Times on Monday that Apple should comply with the FBI, dismissing Cook's claims that it will set a wider precedent of law enforcement agencies hacking into citizen's phones.”

Cook's 'claims' fail as a slippery slope fallacy – unfounded demagoguery and fear-mongering.

 

[kaz]

you side with fear out of ignorance and paranoia...

It's the libertarian way.

You agree with a libertarian, so is that out of rear, ignorance and paranoia on your part?

 

[kaz]

Really? Well, good luck finding one.

Back to the subject:
Would there be any problem with Apple voluntarily putting together a one-time software package inside Apple's own plant, using it to unlock this terrorists' phone, handing the govt all the records from the phone, and then destroying the software package so no one could ever modify it or use it on any other phone?

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

I don't see this as a left or right issue. It's not divided down party lines. I'm as right as you can just about get, and I'm against government forcing a private industry to create items they demand.

I wasn't making a general statement of whether it is a left or right issue, I was answering the narrow question I was asked.

I'm not sure from the discussion we're arguing the same thing. I am not arguing for Apple to give the government a back door the government can use again and again. The NSA has proven how far they can be trusted with that. I don't personally care for Snowden, but I totally support what he did regardless of why he did it.

I'm just arguing that Apple should agree to government giving them the phone and they give government the data. There is no downside to that for them. Anyone knows now they can backdoor the data. If that doesn't meet someone's security requirement, then they already aren't going to use apple phones.

I think Apple should go with private key public key encryption so they can't unlock the data going forward. But as long as they can get this data, they should do it

 

[kaz]

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

Bullshit. Apple is following legal precedent.

In "FBI vs Onstar"

The FBI asked Onstar to modify its in-car information system to be able to eavesdrop on conversations inside the vehicle.

Onstar argued that modifying its product in such a way would render the device inoperable. So the Court of Appeals in the Ninth District agreed with the company that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."

In re Application of the United States, 349 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 11/18/2003)


Furthermore, I have asked you and your ilk to provide EVIDENCE that the San Bernardino Jihad is NOT a false flag operation , and you have been unable to do so.

Finally, the first one who's half way there. you admitted the battle you are fighting, now admit the second half, you're fighting the wrong battle in this case.

I agree with you totally that the idea that companies like Apple and Onstar should not be forced by government to build in back doors to provide government with access to their customer's conversations on demand.

The problem is you're fighting it with the wrong case. Apple decided on their own to go ahead and do it. With Public/Private key encryption available to remove their ability to decrypt, they built in a back door anyway. That was a choice they made,, they need to give the data available to solve the murders.

The solution is to remove the back door. But to argue what you are arguing is arguing the right point with the wrong case

Apple faces at least 12 other All Writs Act orders to force it to unlock more iPhones

Good article, there is a lot going on. I don't see how any of it changes the facts of this case, but there is a lot going on. Apple should just do the OS without the back door, I wonder why they expected that wouldn't lead to exactly this in the first place

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Apple is saying no can do.

It is THEIR software. THEIR business.


.

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

I don't see this as a left or right issue. It's not divided down party lines. I'm as right as you can just about get, and I'm against government forcing a private industry to create items they demand.

I wasn't making a general statement of whether it is a left or right issue, I was answering the narrow question I was asked.

I'm not sure from the discussion we're arguing the same thing. I am not arguing for Apple to give the government a back door the government can use again and again. The NSA has proven how far they can be trusted with that. I don't personally care for Snowden, but I totally support what he did regardless of why he did it.

I'm just arguing that Apple should agree to government giving them the phone and they give government the data. There is no downside to that for them. Anyone knows now they can backdoor the data. If that doesn't meet someone's security requirement, then they already aren't going to use apple phones.

I think Apple should go with private key public key encryption so they can't unlock the data going forward. But as long as they can get this data, they should do it

I'm with you on that if Apple can do it safely, but according to Apple, it's a security risk.

I don't want to pretend I understand it all because I don't. It would seem like common sense to make this program to get the data, then destroy everything, but according to Apple, once it's made, you can't put that Genie back in the bottle.

So again, it's all a matter of who you trust. I do trust Apple. If they say they can't do it 100% safely, then I believe them way more than I would believe our government. It's not like we're talking about a phone obtained from one of the 911 hijackers. These two misfits were more than likely a couple of nobody's in some terrorist organization. The phone probably doesn't have squat in there.

And mind you, I'm all for our surveillance programs. I don't care if the government reads this blog, my e-mail, listens to my conversations on the phone. I have nothing to hide and I believe we need to fight terrorism together. But forcing a private company to produce something for the government is where I draw the line. Because anytime you use the words "force" and "government" in the same paragraph, look out, because we are all about to lose some freedoms in this country.

 

[Bassman007]

The government isn't doing anything to their software or their business. They are trying to investigate a crime they had nothing to do with. There is no threat to them

Why is Apple refusing to comply if it is true that encryption is not adversely affected?

Are they Jihadists?

Are they terrorists?


,

It's ideology, the left is wrong on every issue, this is the left being wrong again.

No one is going to not buy Apple products because they help the police investigate a brutal terrorist attack. Everyone now knows they could help police so there's no facade they can't do it. There is no benefit to them to not assist in getting the data

Bullshit. Apple is following legal precedent.

In "FBI vs Onstar"

The FBI asked Onstar to modify its in-car information system to be able to eavesdrop on conversations inside the vehicle.

Onstar argued that modifying its product in such a way would render the device inoperable. So the Court of Appeals in the Ninth District agreed with the company that compliance would be "unreasonably burdensome."

In re Application of the United States, 349 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 11/18/2003)


Furthermore, I have asked you and your ilk to provide EVIDENCE that the San Bernardino Jihad is NOT a false flag operation , and you have been unable to do so.

Finally, the first one who's half way there. you admitted the battle you are fighting, now admit the second half, you're fighting the wrong battle in this case.

I agree with you totally that the idea that companies like Apple and Onstar should not be forced by government to build in back doors to provide government with access to their customer's conversations on demand.

The problem is you're fighting it with the wrong case. Apple decided on their own to go ahead and do it. With Public/Private key encryption available to remove their ability to decrypt, they built in a back door anyway. That was a choice they made,, they need to give the data available to solve the murders.

The solution is to remove the back door. But to argue what you are arguing is arguing the right point with the wrong case

Apple faces at least 12 other All Writs Act orders to force it to unlock more iPhones

The I-phone is already unlocked, this entire charade is a ruse to confuse ISIS.