Fedgov vs Apple : In re Iphone "backdoor"

[SwimExpert]

That's ridiculous. They are only going to be able to break the code if they designed the code so that they knew how to break it. If they didn't design the code with a back door, then they can't break it, period.

Encryption codes are mathematical algorithms. How do they not know if they put in a back door or not?

You do not need to purposely put in a back door in order to find a hole in the code to exploit.

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Actually, the problem seems to be that you two are talking about two entirely different scenarios, and as a result you're envisioning two entirely different tasks that Apple is being called to do.

You seem to see it as a matter of Apple unlocking the back door and then essentially translating the data. What Kaz is saying is that no back door exists in the first place so they'd have to take a trebuchet to knock down part of the castle walls in order to build a backdoor.

 

[FA_Q2]

You do not need to purposely put in a back door in order to find a hole in the code to exploit.

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Actually, the problem seems to be that you two are talking about two entirely different scenarios, and as a result you're envisioning two entirely different tasks that Apple is being called to do.

You seem to see it as a matter of Apple unlocking the back door and then essentially translating the data. What Kaz is saying is that no back door exists in the first place so they'd have to take a trebuchet to knock down part of the castle walls in order to build a backdoor.

You have us reversed - or at least me.

My point has been this entire time that there is no back door - they literally have to create it.

 

[kaz]

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Actually, the problem seems to be that you two are talking about two entirely different scenarios, and as a result you're envisioning two entirely different tasks that Apple is being called to do.

You seem to see it as a matter of Apple unlocking the back door and then essentially translating the data. What Kaz is saying is that no back door exists in the first place so they'd have to take a trebuchet to knock down part of the castle walls in order to build a backdoor.

You have us reversed - or at least me.

My point has been this entire time that there is no back door - they literally have to create it.

Which is of course why they didn't just say that in the first place...

 

[FA_Q2]

You do not need to purposely put in a back door in order to find a hole in the code to exploit.

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

I'm responding to the point you keep making that Apple can't break the code, which if true, would be what they would have argued in the first place. If you want me to stop addressing that point, stop making it.

I already addressed the central point. If Apple can help them decrypt this phone, they should do that. I don't support Apple being forced to give the government a permanent back door to any apple phone

I made that assertion once. They have not even tried but I will give you that Apple is not only confident that they can break it but that they know how to do so already. The fact is that the software that is required for this, however, simply does not exist. Apple must write it.

Again, if you don't support them having a permanent back door into any phone then how can you support the government forcing them to create exactly that. That is precisely what they are asking for.
Here's What The FBI Actually Asked Apple To Do

 

[FA_Q2]

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Actually, the problem seems to be that you two are talking about two entirely different scenarios, and as a result you're envisioning two entirely different tasks that Apple is being called to do.

You seem to see it as a matter of Apple unlocking the back door and then essentially translating the data. What Kaz is saying is that no back door exists in the first place so they'd have to take a trebuchet to knock down part of the castle walls in order to build a backdoor.

You have us reversed - or at least me.

My point has been this entire time that there is no back door - they literally have to create it.

Which is of course why they didn't just say that in the first place...

They have said that.

What do you think they have been asserting? They have to actually write a broken OS, install it on the phone and then the FBI can brute force the phone itself. There is a link right in the post above this one - read it.

 

[kaz]

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

I'm responding to the point you keep making that Apple can't break the code, which if true, would be what they would have argued in the first place. If you want me to stop addressing that point, stop making it.

I already addressed the central point. If Apple can help them decrypt this phone, they should do that. I don't support Apple being forced to give the government a permanent back door to any apple phone

I made that assertion once. They have not even tried but I will give you that Apple is not only confident that they can break it but that they know how to do so already. The fact is that the software that is required for this, however, simply does not exist. Apple must write it.

Again, if you don't support them having a permanent back door into any phone then how can you support the government forcing them to create exactly that. That is precisely what they are asking for.
Here's What The FBI Actually Asked Apple To Do

whatever, I'll debate what I argued, I won't debate what I didn't

 

[FA_Q2]

Apparently you wont even do that...

 

[NYcarbineer]

That's ridiculous. They are only going to be able to break the code if they designed the code so that they knew how to break it. If they didn't design the code with a back door, then they can't break it, period.

Encryption codes are mathematical algorithms. How do they not know if they put in a back door or not?

You do not need to purposely put in a back door in order to find a hole in the code to exploit.

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Try reading something from someone who might better know about this stuff than you:

Apple can comply with the FBI court order

 

[FA_Q2]

You do not need to purposely put in a back door in order to find a hole in the code to exploit.

Do some research on public/private key encryption. If it's encrypted, the code has nothing to do with it, you can't decrypt it

Tell that to the thousands of previous hackers and code breakers that have done so when there was no back door built into the encryption.

Breaking encryption is nothing new and no, it has never required that a back door be built in. In this case Apple is being asked to develop a workaround to the pass code limit that is built into the phone and wipes it after so many times an incorrect code is put in so the FBI can brute force hack phones. A brute force hack will be very easy to accomplish without a limit on the number of times you can input the pass code. IOW, a work around of the software is exactly what they are asking for.

Again, read up on public key/private key encryption. The key to the back door isn't the code, it's putting in a back door in the algorithm. The code is easy

*sigh*

You are blatantly ignoring what the FBI is asking Apple to do. If you are going to ignore the entire center of the subject then there is no way to talk to you about it.

Try reading something from someone who might better know about this stuff than you:

Apple can comply with the FBI court order

You going to make a point with that because you have not pointed out where I was incorrect.

 

[P@triot]

A good article which outlines just about everything wrong with the government's unconstitutional position...

X-Patriot | Apple vs. FBI

 

[kaz]

Apparently you wont even do that...

Content?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A good article which outlines just about everything wrong with the government's unconstitutional position...

X-Patriot | Apple vs. FBI

I didn't look into it, but I heard on the radio that some person addressed the FBI claiming that he was able to break the Apple protections of an I-phone. I didn't hear much more than that, but I heard it just two days ago.