Fedgov vs Apple : In re Iphone "backdoor"

[jillian]

Yeah, if the gummit wanted the ability to read every apple phone, it'd be a totally different issue. At that point, the gummit would be taking Apple's right to build a product that people use legally with every legit expectation to privacy. (that's the Snowden angle) But no one has a right to use a product that can be legally purchased to do an illegal act. (that's like a gun)

The intel agencies break the rules all the time; and rightfully so if there is imminent danger involved. If Apple handed over the information the FBI is seeking, their privacy feature is compromised and everybody knows it. So what should happen is the Feds take the phone to Apple headquarters, they meet in a room with Apple engineers, and then wait in the lobby for the results. win-win.

Yes. If this was about Apple being told to hand over the code, it'd be different matter. And you are correct that Apple is hardly being the champion of little people seeking to avoid warrantless spying based on no reasonable suspicion.

there *was* a court order.

 

[jillian]

Yes. If this was about Apple being told to hand over the code, it'd be different matter. And you are correct that Apple is hardly being the champion of little people seeking to avoid warrantless spying based on no reasonable suspicion.

our government should send in a techie whiz kid to infiltrate Apple corp and obtain the key.

they can do it, they're afraid of apple's auto delete which will wipe the phone after 12 tries to get in.

 

[Tom Horn]

So what's new? Why would a socialist support a private business?

All businesses should relocate overseas and you stupid son of bitches starve or ask Comrade Sanders to create money out of thin air to support you.

I'm a Rubio supporter, dumbass.

 

[Valerie]

Yes. If this was about Apple being told to hand over the code, it'd be different matter. And you are correct that Apple is hardly being the champion of little people seeking to avoid warrantless spying based on no reasonable suspicion.

our government should send in a techie whiz kid to infiltrate Apple corp and obtain the key.

they can do it, they're afraid of apple's auto delete which will wipe the phone after 12 tries to get in.

yeah, they need to break the code to bypass that feature...

btw i watched the alan turing movie recently... velly intellestink!

great story.. check it out if you haven't seen it...

 

[Contumacious]

Yeah, if the gummit wanted the ability to read every apple phone, it'd be a totally different issue. At that point, the gummit would be taking Apple's right to build a product that people use legally with every legit expectation to privacy. (that's the Snowden angle) But no one has a right to use a product that can be legally purchased to do an illegal act. (that's like a gun)

The intel agencies break the rules all the time; and rightfully so if there is imminent danger involved. If Apple handed over the information the FBI is seeking, their privacy feature is compromised and everybody knows it. So what should happen is the Feds take the phone to Apple headquarters, they meet in a room with Apple engineers, and then wait in the lobby for the results. win-win.

Yes. If this was about Apple being told to hand over the code, it'd be different matter. And you are correct that Apple is hardly being the champion of little people seeking to avoid warrantless spying based on no reasonable suspicion.

there *was* a court order.

There are no"courts" hence there are no valid orders.

Apple must resist.

Let them destroy the company and all those jobs.

 

[Tom Horn]

they can do it, they're afraid of apple's auto delete which will wipe the phone after 12 tries to get in.

I've read you get 6 tries after which you're locked out for progressively more time after each one. The magic number is 10...then the system wipes itself clean.

 

[Contumacious]

So what's new? Why would a socialist support a private business?

All businesses should relocate overseas and you stupid son of bitches starve or ask Comrade Sanders to create money out of thin air to support you.

I'm a Rubio supporter, dumbass.

Thought so.

Marco Rubio: Crony Capitalist
Laurence M. Vance

Rubio supports federal sugar subsidies. He is a warmonger, a crony capitalist, and a welfare statist. This means he is a typical Republican. See also my “Uncle Sam Is a Sugar Daddy.”

 

[Tom Horn]

Thought so.

Marco Rubio: Crony Capitalist
Laurence M. Vance

Rubio supports federal sugar subsidies. He is a warmonger, a crony capitalist, and a welfare statist. This means he is a typical Republican. See also my “Uncle Sam Is a Sugar Daddy.”

You're not worth bothering with.

 

[Valerie]

where do Apple corps loyalties reeeeally lie..?

why do they protect terrorist info and thumb their nose at a warrant in the name of freedum?

paranoia will destroy ya! and it goes like this........... ^

 

[Valerie]

There are no"courts" hence there are no valid orders.

Apple must resist.

Let them destroy the company and all those jobs.

extortion is cool with you, eh?


"There are no "courts" hence there are no valid orders." in fantasia...

 

[Contumacious]

Thought so.

Marco Rubio: Crony Capitalist
Laurence M. Vance

Rubio supports federal sugar subsidies. He is a warmonger, a crony capitalist, and a welfare statist. This means he is a typical Republican. See also my “Uncle Sam Is a Sugar Daddy.”

You're not worth bothering with.

Too smart for ya'.

 

[g5000]

There are two issues. First the terrorist had a right to an expectation of privacy to areas we all expect privacy - our homes, our cars as we go about daily life, what we say in private conversations on our phones, for example. Once the gummit has a rational reason to believe we are committing crimes in our homes, cars or on phones, traditionally it can get a warrant to discover what we are up to. The terrorist gave up her right to privacy concerning phone calls back in Dec. So, this has absolutely no comparison to Snowden.

The second issue is Apple's right. Apple sells a product that has as one feature an ability to defeat the gummit's ability to see what's in it, that is who called and any data stored on it. The purchaser, the terrorist, no longer has any claim to privacy. Where does Apple derive any right to not allow the gummit access to that PARTICULAR phone? Seriously. I'm asking. Is it just that Apple thinks if it allows access then it's products will not be as appealing to purchasers?

This is not about Apple accessing a dead terrorist's phone. This is about Apple being made to make EVERY Apple phone hackable.

The government wants Apple to put a back door in EVERY phone. And back doors can be hacked, not just by the government.

 

[Contumacious]

where do Apple corps loyalties reeeeally lie..?

why do they protect terrorist info and thumb their nose at a warrant in the name of freedum?

paranoia will destroy ya! and it goes like this........... ^

Shut the fuck up.

Loyalty to their stockholders.

They have a right not to be drafted into the FBI's "war on terror".

When you have evidence that the San Bernardino affair was a terrorist attack and not a false flag operation repost

 

[g5000]

Trump the typical fascist corporatocrat favors the state.
.

I've said it before. The idea of Donald Trump's hands on the reins of the Department of Fatherland Homeland Security makes me shudder.

 

[g5000]

A serious concern for Apple is that if their customers think the government can hack into their phones, the customers will buy phones from Apple's competitors.

 

[Contumacious]

There are two issues. First the terrorist had a right to an expectation of privacy to areas we all expect privacy - our homes, our cars as we go about daily life, what we say in private conversations on our phones, for example. Once the gummit has a rational reason to believe we are committing crimes in our homes, cars or on phones, traditionally it can get a warrant to discover what we are up to. The terrorist gave up her right to privacy concerning phone calls back in Dec. So, this has absolutely no comparison to Snowden.

The second issue is Apple's right. Apple sells a product that has as one feature an ability to defeat the gummit's ability to see what's in it, that is who called and any data stored on it. The purchaser, the terrorist, no longer has any claim to privacy. Where does Apple derive any right to not allow the gummit access to that PARTICULAR phone? Seriously. I'm asking. Is it just that Apple thinks if it allows access then it's products will not be as appealing to purchasers?

This is not about Apple accessing a dead terrorist's phone. This is about Apple being made to make EVERY Apple phone hackable.

The government wants Apple to put a back door in EVERY phone. And back doors can be hacked, not just by the government.

Exactomundo.

Why can't the motherfuckers understand that?

And once iphones are hackable that's it folks - they are finished , exactly what the federal government has done to the railroads and other businesses.

 

[Valerie]

When you have evidence that the San Bernardino affair was a terrorist attack and not a false flag operation repost

a warrant was issued...that is due process!

 

[g5000]

Yes. If this was about Apple being told to hand over the code, it'd be different matter. And you are correct that Apple is hardly being the champion of little people seeking to avoid warrantless spying based on no reasonable suspicion.

our government should send in a techie whiz kid to infiltrate Apple corp and obtain the key.

There is no key. That's the whole point.

 

[Contumacious]

A serious concern for Apple is that if their customers think the government can hack into their phones, the customers will buy phones from Apple's competitors.

Thank you sir for making that point eminently clear.


.

 

[Valerie]

the code is the key

gawd