Is Apple making a big mistake....

Mikey081057 · February 2016

TB their (San Bernadino) policy was flawed. By them having the proper tools in place they would have had admin rights over all their phones. So having a proper pword and admin policy is required, the admin has the ability to maintain, oversee and secure the data on that device. Having a policy where other people or lists of pwords hanging around is a no no.Would be interesting to see the policy that was signed by the terrorist.

I still think Apple is being weenies about this. They just need to turn the data over to them. They can do it, but it would then seem to all of their followers that they can and are being watched.

motorhead43026 · February 2016

The user of the phone did not lock it. The phone is locked because investigators tried to access the phone. After (10) failed password attempts the phone locked.

tonyb · February 2016

I'm with ya bro, Apple needs to turn over that info, but It's my understanding....and I could be wrong, that Uncle Sam wants the keys to the whole Kingdom, not just that one phone. That's where the point of contention sits.

tonyb · February 2016

motorhead43026 wrote: »

The user of the phone did not lock it. The phone is locked because investigators tried to access the phone. After (10) failed password attempts the phone locked.

Then my question is.....is that option not able to be tailored at the owners request ? Why didn't investigators ask Apple before hand how to proceed ? Certainly with the amount of I-phones in government hands they should know this one would think.

Mikey081057 · February 2016

I wouldn't give the feds the keys no way... I would give them the data...Strikes me as odd that in 2016 the federal government does not have a policy/agreement in place with the manufacturers regarding recovery of data in a case of national security... But we do have to put calorie counts on menus.

The locking condition exists, but the data is encrypted which is the issue. I don't know if the FBI has locked out the phone as they are aware that excessive attempts will wipe the phone.

They are asking Apple for a software override tool which will allow that to hack the password without wiping... Again if the local government had the same policy and tools that businesses have in place the admin would have rights over this and all owned devices.

xsmi · February 2016

Mikey081057 wrote: »

xsmi wrote: »

gimpod wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

Nice to see ya Tony.[/

xsmi wrote: »

You were right until you got to that part. Apple DOES NOT mine their customer's data for themselves which is why the encryption key for all of the user's data is on the device.

I don't believe this for a second ALL corporations data mine there customer's, They mainly use the info to better target there products and customer's, some even sell that info for a tidy profit, And you actually believe Apple is the exception. I'm sure they would love for all there customer's to believe it.

And who creates that encryption key ? Apple does.

I beg to differ. Nothing in my dealings with Apple tells me otherwise. I still get emails from them telling me about special deals on a new Mac and I just bought one for Christmas. I get emails about iPhones and I just bought 2 of those in September and October.

Do you ever notice how if you search for something in the App Store, you leave it come back in and the recommendations are STILL not tailored to you? Because they don't mine your data.

Do a Google search or search for something on Amazon, then watch the boarders of your pages. THAT'S data mining at its finest.

And somewhere in the agreements that you have clicked on lets them do it... Have you ever read a software license agreement.

Yes. Except in Apple's they say they won't. Microsoft said they won't in Bing, but will in Windows 10.

Mikey081057 · February 2016

I think the FBI having hit the Pword limit is a rumor... Hitting the limit will wipe the phone.

Mikey081057 · February 2016

xsmi wrote: »

Mikey081057 wrote: »

xsmi wrote: »

gimpod wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

Nice to see ya Tony.[/

xsmi wrote: »

You were right until you got to that part. Apple DOES NOT mine their customer's data for themselves which is why the encryption key for all of the user's data is on the device.

I don't believe this for a second ALL corporations data mine there customer's, They mainly use the info to better target there products and customer's, some even sell that info for a tidy profit, And you actually believe Apple is the exception. I'm sure they would love for all there customer's to believe it.

And who creates that encryption key ? Apple does.

I beg to differ. Nothing in my dealings with Apple tells me otherwise. I still get emails from them telling me about special deals on a new Mac and I just bought one for Christmas. I get emails about iPhones and I just bought 2 of those in September and October.

Do you ever notice how if you search for something in the App Store, you leave it come back in and the recommendations are STILL not tailored to you? Because they don't mine your data.

Do a Google search or search for something on Amazon, then watch the boarders of your pages. THAT'S data mining at its finest.

And somewhere in the agreements that you have clicked on lets them do it... Have you ever read a software license agreement.

Yes. Except in Apple's they say they won't. Microsoft said they won't in Bing, but will in Windows 10.

So are you saying they are in violation? Have you read them all? and all of their privacy policies... I am sure you would need a team of lawyers to argue them and it would cost more money to litigate than the average person could afford.

maximillian · February 2016

I think the cloud password was reset. So now they have to go after the phone. However, the feds know there's a 10 try limit before the phone wipes the data (not just locks them out). So they are asking Apple to deactivate this feature, i.e. a custom iOS. This is (at least) part of the tool that Apple is talking about. I think they are asking for other modifications to the OS but I can't find the details. Based on the specific technical details this may or may not be a backdoor.

According to this, the tool does not exist yet:

http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

Mikey081057 · February 2016

That seems to be the most accurate summary to date...

going back to my earlier point though... wouldn't it just seem that the gov should have had service level agreements in place with the manufacturers? No they have to litigate this for all the terrorists to see and laugh at us. But at least we got our calorie counts.

maximillian · February 2016

Sounds like they would have no way to prevent users from changing passcodes and locking out admin control. Only way to control this is to periodically ask to inspect phones from each user to make sure the IT admins still have access.

http://ktla.com/2016/02/18/why-didnt-san-bernardino-county-officials-have-access-to-the-terrorist-iphone/

What this may boil down to is that iPhones are not appropriate tools for government stored data, since you can't easily regain access if a user changes the passcodes.

motorhead43026 · February 2016

I thought I heard the user changed the passcode 24hrs before the shootings?

Mikey081057 · February 2016

maximillian wrote: »

Sounds like they would have no way to prevent users from changing passcodes and locking out admin control. Only way to control this is to periodically ask to inspect phones from each user to make sure the IT admins still have access.

http://ktla.com/2016/02/18/why-didnt-san-bernardino-county-officials-have-access-to-the-terrorist-iphone/

What this may boil down to is that iPhones are not appropriate tools for government stored data, since you can't easily regain access if a user changes the passcodes.

But they have unlocked them before?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/17/apple-unlocked-iphones-for-the-feds-70-times-before.html

tonyb · February 2016

maximillian wrote: »

Sounds like they would have no way to prevent users from changing passcodes and locking out admin control. Only way to control this is to periodically ask to inspect phones from each user to make sure the IT admins still have access.

http://ktla.com/2016/02/18/why-didnt-san-bernardino-county-officials-have-access-to-the-terrorist-iphone/

What this may boil down to is that iPhones are not appropriate tools for government stored data, since you can't easily regain access if a user changes the passcodes.

Actually, just the opposite. Perfect government phone when they want to keep what THEY do secret. They just don't want the average joe to have that same level of secrecy. Double edged sword ?

Maybe, count me crazy and all, can't government order a specially prepared phone not just from apple but from any other manufacturer that enables them to have access constantly. I find it hard to believe in todays day that's not possible. At the very least, to lower level employees who will most likely not contain any government secrets that can be hacked. In other words, given this employees position, did he really need an I-phone ? Could he had not done his job with an android on boost mobile ?

Just sayin'....the guy wasn't a high level government official in need of top security for his phone. Throw these people a 100 buck android to stay in contact, review the B.S. stuff county governments discuss.

tonyb · February 2016

While I love it Ken, you can probably plug in any major corporation into that too....along with banks.

We are getting away from Apple's woes though....or the governments, depending on how you look at it.

BlueFox · February 2016

I am not sure how a strict constitutionalist would interpret this situation. There is no mention of any rights regarding cell phones in the Constitution. I suppose you could reinterpret it to extend something in it to also cover cell phones, but then that would imply a living Constitution, which then negates the strict interpretation aspect. Oh my.

maximillian · February 2016

This isn't the exact quote from Scalia because the exact quote talks about something taboo on this forum. However, I thought it appropriate:

"We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001) "

He goes on to say that instruments that didn't exist at the creation of the Bill of Rights is a covered by a prima facie extension.

So no, we do not need new laws to cover new technology. Stick to the constitution.

At issue is whether or not the government should compel someone to modify instruments to make it possible to execute a warrant. Apple has said that it is technology possible to do so, but refuses to do so because of the implications to privacy. The feds say that Apple can keep the tool, they just want this one device modified. Apple says that once the tool is created then it can't control it, thus a security risk. My guess is that a judge is going to drill down on that security risk but may ultimately compel Apple to comply.

mrbiron · February 2016

Apple......hipster central.
"apple is the best for standing up to gov'ment. woohoo apple, you ROCK! best company that ever existed. Steve jobs for Pres...ooops"
*facepalm*

I dont understand why this is so difficult. Take files off phone, put on hardrive, give hardrive to FBI. The fact that Apple is saying "we don't have the program" is a load of $hit. The phone means nothing. Who cares about the phone!

This was a terrorist act. Terrorism.....need we say more?

And apple not mining.....pfffffffft!....PFFFFFFTTTT!!!!!

Mikey081057 · February 2016

Irony. Apple is the darling or the anti corporate movement society.

Yet they make ridiculous profits and use cheap labor.... Is anybody screaming for Apple to pay a $15 per hour minimum wage to it's overseas labor force? They make about $1.50 per hour.

Mikey081057 · February 2016

BlueFox wrote: »

I am not sure how a strict constitutionalist would interpret this situation. There is no mention of any rights regarding cell phones in the Constitution. I suppose you could reinterpret it to extend something in it to also cover cell phones, but then that would imply a living Constitution, which then negates the strict interpretation aspect. Oh my.

Which I guess that means it is more important than Calorie Counts on Menus.

We pass other edicts without Constitutional SCOTUS review...Why can't we get this one talked through?

Why is this a political football as opposed to the "Right Thing To Do?"

lightman1 · February 2016

lightman1 · February 2016

Mikey081057 · February 2016

rpf65 · February 2016

I don't know, maybe I just view this situation differently. What if they were chasing a car thief, who they suspected of being part of a large scale organization. The thief wrecked, and died at the scene. The police found the same IPhone, and wanted a judge to force Apple to write a new code, so they could access information and possibly find out if the thief acted alone or he was part of some organization.

He may have very well been acting alone, but there is a chance that he is part of some crime ring. Law enforcement really needs that information to make sure that he was acting alone.

Does your opinion change?

Two totally different things? Terrorism isn't anywhere near the same as stealing a car?

Exactly the point. Almost everybody would be saying that law enforcement should get off their lazy as s and do some leg work if they think he was part of some organization. Their privacy is way more important than catching a bunch of car thieves.

Not much difference the way I see it. We have 2 different crimes. The people that committed them are all dead. A IPhone may help law enforcement figure out if they acted alone or as part as a group, but may also contain no useful information at all.

Mikey081057 · February 2016

Are these car thieves a threat to national security.... I think not... but let me pose a more accurate scenario. They have seized all of the information they could... files, paperwork, financial transactions, phone records, employment history, purchases, travel history. but they can't get what is on their Apple product? These people committed a heinous act of murder and terror...they didn't steal someone's Camaro. There is more at stake here than Apple's marketing philosophy.

The people that committed the crime are all dead but there may be co conspirators and conspiracy to commit terror is a crime as well.

Apple needs to watch their fat posteriors. They can fall out of favor very easily on this one.

nooshinjohn · February 2016

I wonder if those against the government being able to gather information from this phone would have a different opinion on the matter if the terrorists chose a school instead of his workplace.

The government should have every right to get any information these two generated from the time they were hatched right up until their deaths. Anyone or any device should rightly be considered as fair game in any investigation such as this.

Apple bears a certain responsibility, as a corporation, and as Americans, to comply with doing everything they can to help with this specific device., and on a case by case basis going forward. I Call bs on them not being able to keep the means of doing so a closely guarded secret, used only in extraordinary circumstances.

If they refuse, I will vote my wallet and go to Samsung next time I need a tablet or a phone.

Dabutcher · February 2016

I am with Apple on this one. FBI wants keys to the Kingdom and is using terrorism as a scare tactic to get the public on board. Eventually, unfortunately Apple will bow down. Every other world leader will want a back door into the phones also. Russia, China to name a few. I love all my apple stuff. It just works. Works well for a long time. Peace. D

BlueFox · February 2016

I can't cut Apple any slack on this issue. They can't hide behind the Constitution and expect to get away from doing their duty. Especially since they keep billions of dollars in profit overseas so they can avoid paying tax on it. F them, and Google, and all the other parasitic tax dodging companies.

rpf65 · February 2016

Mikey081057 wrote: »

Are these car thieves a threat to national security.... I think not... but let me pose a more accurate scenario. They have seized all of the information they could... files, paperwork, financial transactions, phone records, employment history, purchases, travel history. but they can't get what is on their Apple product? These people committed a heinous act of murder and terror...they didn't steal someone's Camaro. There is more at stake here than Apple's marketing philosophy.

The people that committed the crime are all dead but there may be co conspirators and conspiracy to commit terror is a crime as well.

Apple needs to watch their fat posteriors. They can fall out of favor very easily on this one.

The FBI couldn't get any information off of any of their other electronic products. They completely destroyed them, to the point that no data could be retrieved.

These people were patient, and planned for the maximum amount of damage/murders they could cause. This phone was intact, working, but locked.

Just can't believe they would be that careless, and not destroy this phone if there was any evidence on it. No way he was worried about loosing his job for violating policy about personal calls/web sites.

My problem is that this situation is most definitely terrorism, but the worthless piece of sxxx that killed a few soldiers a few years back was "work place violence". No publicized report of an investigation to terrorist ties to that little incident.

Not saying that I don't believe that more people could be involved. I would probably think there would be 90 percent plus chance that there is. I also agree that national security is an issue here.

My problem is that somehow this is partially Apples fault. It's Apples fault that people want whatever people feel is personal information; private, and they spent millions of dollars developing a product that does that.

It's Apples fault that this persons employee uses their products, because they simply work. It's also Apples fault that every non-Apple product was totally destroyed, but their product was so secure that there was no reason to believe that information could every retrieved from that IPhone.

Really simple here. Apple violated no law. If people want every software provider to provide a/multiple government agencies access to information, pass a law. Make sure you include in that law that the company is in no way responsible for your information being compromised.

As far as the argument for the government wanting Apple to control the key, and simply provide the data to them. How is Apple going to be compensated?

Then what is the threshold that the information be provided? Let's face it, no way will this be a one time incident. Apple did it once why not 2 or 500 times?

Sorry, I'm just tired of somebody sitting in some office, with some governmental title, saying some person/entity has to do/not do this or that: just because.

In case you didn't notice, there terrorists have already won.

How?

We're having this debate.

rpf65 · February 2016

nooshinjohn wrote: »

I wonder if those against the government being able to gather information from this phone would have a different opinion on the matter if the terrorists chose a school instead of his workplace.

The government should have every right to get any information these two generated from the time they were hatched right up until their deaths. Anyone or any device should rightly be considered as fair game in any investigation such as this.

Apple bears a certain responsibility, as a corporation, and as Americans, to comply with doing everything they can to help with this specific device., and on a case by case basis going forward. I Call bs on them not being able to keep the means of doing so a closely guarded secret, used only in extraordinary circumstances.

If they refuse, I will vote my wallet and go to Samsung next time I need a tablet or a phone.[/quote

Amazing.

There are 2 choices, and only 2 choices. Do you want to live in a land of laws or a land of man.

There is no difference between murdering 14 adults or 14 children. The same amount of people died. In either case, each were an innocent victim. All life is precious, and people should be reminded of that from time to time.

In the U.S., the government has no rights. The people have rights. The governments have duties and responsibilities. Rights are reserved for citizens to protect them from government abusing the power entrusted to them by the citizens.

Again, people tend to forget this, or were never made aware of this to begin with. The other side is people must take responsibility for there actions.

Problem I have with the FBI in this instance. Try this:

Reporter: Mr FBI guy, is this an isolated incident, or is it part of coordinated attack.

FBI guy: If Apple would unlock this IPhone we could track down the rest of the bad guys.

Reporter: Did you find anything else in their house to help with the investigation?

FBI guy: No, every other piece of electronic gear and scrap of paper was destroyed. They even burned the toilet paper. I swear, if Apple would give us access to this IPhone, we would know every identity of every terrorist on the world.

Reporter: I've heard that this was his work phone, and actually the property of San Bernidino county. Do they have a record of his phone calls, e-mails, messages, and/or web visits?

FBI guy: Look, Apple made this phone, and it should be their job to keep track of this information.

Reporter: But sir, there is about a billion IPhones out there. Do you really think that Apple should track all calls, data, and web sites for everyone of them?

FBI guy: Well if they were a patriotic American company they would. What kind of idiotic company wouldn't have this information, knowing that it is possible that some terrorist could destroy all of the other electronic devices except theirs?

Reporter: How many other electronic devices did you find that belonged to this couple?

FBI guy: We found 14 other communication devices, but they were all destroyed. So we know for a fact that this one devise will allow us to track down every terrorist on the planet. Look at it, not a scratch on it.

Just think that sometimes people should be comfortable saying: "I don't know." That's the real problem here. The FBI really doesn't know if others could be involved. Would I like them to find them if they exist? Yes.

Do I want them to search you mail, listen to your phone calls, read you e-nails to find them? Absolutely not. Seems like you don't have a problem with them doing that to me.

Is Apple making a big mistake....

Comments