Fedgov vs Apple : In re Iphone "backdoor"

[Contumacious]

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

a warrant was issued...

INvalid warrants are issued all the time.......ask the Davidians

Like I said, now that the Constitution (1787) is a dead letter we have no protection.


.

 

[g5000]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

 

[Valerie]

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.

a serious concern for our government is the legal precedent with corporate encryption capabilities.

no doubt paranoid people, anti gubmint types, and terrorists will love a corporation willing to aid and abet them.

 

[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.

a serious concern for our government is the legal precedent with corporate encryption capabilities.

no doubt paranoid people, anti gubmint types, and terrorists will love a corporation willing to aid and abet them.

You have a totalitarian mindset. It's scary how much you trust the government.

You know, the right wing rubes were just fine with handing Bush all kinds of police powers with the Patriot Act and the DHS. And then one day, a black guy was handed the baton. Suddenly, all those same rubes were shocked, shocked at the amount of government abuse going on here!

You want to trust this government, and every future government, with this invasion of our privacy. That's nuts.

 

[Valerie]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

i get it.. see my first post in this thread regarding scotus precedent on nsa surveillance.

you can't claim harm based solely on paranoia.

 

[g5000]

a serious concern for our government is the legal precedent with corporate encryption capabilities.

It's not a legal precedent. Ever since the first person whispered in another person's ear, we have had privacy and secrets which have needed to be protected.

Long before the first letter was mailed, or the first phone call was made, we needed to be protected from government spying.

 

[bendog]

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.

I don't think that's exactly it. Apple seems to be saying once we build a back door, it'll get out and anyone can have their phone hacked. I'm not a software guy, but the question seems to be .... assuming Apple takes the phone and opens it w/o the 4 digit password, and gives the phone to the FBI, can the FBI reverse engineer it to have the hack?

The FBI and the IPhone: How Apple's Security Features Have Locked Investigators Out

 

[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.

a serious concern for our government is the legal precedent with corporate encryption capabilities.

no doubt paranoid people, anti gubmint types, and terrorists will love a corporation willing to aid and abet them.

Businesses , individuals , pro Constitution and pro Liberty types must aid Apple and any business who prevents the motherfuckers in government from spying on us.

There is ONLY one solution - the bastards inside the DC beltway must cease and desist interfering in the internal affairs of other nations. That's the ONLY solution. Stop creating terrorists.


.


.

 

[g5000]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

i get it.. see my first post in this thread regarding scotus precedent on nsa surveillance.

you can't claim harm based solely on paranoia.

It's the government that is paranoid. They cannot violate our privacy without due process.

You are seriously, seriously confused. You seem to think the government is allowed to read my mail as long as I am not harmed!

 

[Valerie]

You have a totalitarian mindset. It's scary how much you trust the government.

it's scary how much you'd rather trust soulless irresponsible corporations...

due process produced a warrant which the encryption corporation (Apple this time) is defying based on paranoia.

 

[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.

I don't think that's exactly it.

See post 64.

Then see post 57.

 

[bendog]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

i get it.. see my first post in this thread regarding scotus precedent on nsa surveillance.

you can't claim harm based solely on paranoia.

It's the government that is paranoid. They cannot violate our privacy without due process.

You are seriously, seriously confused. You seem to think the government is allowed to read my mail as long as I am not harmed!

Well, there's the question. Assuming Apple build the code to unlock the phone, and unlocked it, and gave it to the FBI, would the FBI then have the code to unlock all phones?

 

[g5000]

You have a totalitarian mindset. It's scary how much you trust the government.

it's scary how much you'd rather trust soulless irresponsible corporations...

This has nothing to do with trusting a corporation. Your socialist mask is slipping.

due process produced a warrant which the encryption corporation (Apple this time) is defying based on paranoia.

Apple does not have the key. They are not violating the warrant.

Imagine a home builder creates a house. Then the house is sold. The buyer of the house then commits a crime. The government then approaches the home builder for a key to the suspect's house. The home builder doesn't have a key.

That's the end of it as far as the home builder's involvement.

Apple built a phone without a key.

 

[SwimExpert]

The San Bernadino shooter lived in a house.
That house had locks on the doors.
The locks were made by Acme Lock Co.

Why should Acme Lock Co. be required to pick the lock to the front door?

It's all fine and dandy for the authorities to want to conduct a search to look for evidence of further terrorist activity. If the government wants to find a way to enter the house to conduct that search, good on them. But there is no justification for demanding that the lock company get involved and be forced to become an agent of government activity.

 

[g5000]

To be specific, there currently does not exist any software which can penetrate the terrorist's Apple phone.

Being the owners of the source code, Apple might be able to write such software, but then it would be able to not just hack into the terrorist's phone, it would be able to open EVERY Apple phone.

Apple does not want that kind of software created. It would be like creating a supervirus, and the government claiming, "We're just gonna kill this one bad guy with it."

i get it.. see my first post in this thread regarding scotus precedent on nsa surveillance.

you can't claim harm based solely on paranoia.

It's the government that is paranoid. They cannot violate our privacy without due process.

You are seriously, seriously confused. You seem to think the government is allowed to read my mail as long as I am not harmed!

Well, there's the question. Assuming Apple build the code to unlock the phone, and unlocked it, and gave it to the FBI, would the FBI then have the code to unlock all phones?

Apple would have the code. And the whole world would know it.

Confidence in the privacy of Apple's products would evaporate. Their business would suffer.

So there's the harm, by the way, Valerie .

 

[g5000]

It's coming.

Wait for it...

 

[jillian]

You have a totalitarian mindset. It's scary how much you trust the government.

it's scary how much you'd rather trust soulless irresponsible corporations...

due process produced a warrant which the encryption corporation (Apple this time) is defying based on paranoia.

Valerie I think Apple wants this to go all the way up to the Supreme Court, which is it's right. I can't imagine they'd violate the order of the Court.

 

[Valerie]

i can see the ads now...

Apple iphone, preferred communication device for terrorists worldwide.

 

[Valerie]

Valerie I think Apple wants this to go all the way up to the Supreme Court, which is it's right. I can't imagine they'd violate the order of the Court.

yeah, where's scalia when you need him..

 

[g5000]

Valerie, you obviously don't trust corporations. Yet you want Apple to create a key which they could use to hack into your phone.

Would you want a home builder to have keys to every house they built? How well do you trust that none of the employees will rob you blind?

This is what you want Apple to do. Create a master key that can open every phone.