Apple vs. the Feds: Who is right?

[shockmonster]

This has some political overtones but this is an issue that most of us may agree on (Conservative or Liberal). Who is right?

Is Apple doing this to protect their customers?

Are they doing this to line their pocketbook?

Are they unwittingly protecting all terrorists and putting American citizens at risk?

[MoValley John]

I will not but Apple products, I have in the past, but haven't for several years. That said, in this fight, Apple is right.

[RoyalShock]

I would generally say that Apple is right. Though the fact this is posthumous clouds the issue for me. I'm not sure on which side I fall. Surely there's some case law regarding expectation of privacy after one has passed on?

[The Mad Hatter]

I would generally say that Apple is right. Though the fact this is posthumous clouds the issue for me. I'm not sure on which side I fall. Surely there's some case law regarding expectation of privacy after one has passed on?

The thing is that in addition to the privacy issue (which is a legit concern), most security experts that I have read oppose the type of encryption breaking that the feds want on the grounds that those actions would compromise the security of systems in a way that over the long term would be at least as beneficial to criminals/terrorists as it would be to law enforcement in the short term.

[SB Shock]

The thing is that in addition to the privacy issue (which is a legit concern), most security experts that I have read oppose the type of encryption breaking that the feds want on the grounds that those actions would compromise the security of systems in a way that over the long term would be at least as beneficial to criminals/terrorists as it would be to law enforcement in the short term.

Isn't the issue not that they want to break the encryption (the feds/NSA can do that in heart beat), but they just want the safety measure disable where if to many password attempts the phone erases the contents?

This is also a work phone provided by the city, not a personal phone.

Apple really talking out their ass anyway

Obama's sharp criticism on China's new rules for foreign technology companies has been undermined by the fact that Apple has already agreed to the plans, Quartz reports.
A tabled counter-terrorism law will force almost all foreign tech companies in the country to provide source code and encryption keys for inspection, and install backdoors to allow surveillance access. These proposals come after previous regulations on foreign financial technology companies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-china-security-checks-obama-criticism-2015-3?r=UK&IR=T

[shockmonster]

I will not but Apple products, I have in the past, but haven't for several years. That said, in this fight, Apple is right.

Why are they right? My understanding is that all that is being asked is to break the code on this one phone by the court order. No other phones will be affected. Maybe the FBI findls out others who are mixed up in these killings and possibly save other Americans. The info. can be written down and handed over to the FBI and then Apple can destroy that one phone.

[Kung Wu]

Why are they right? My understanding is that all that is being asked is to break the code on this one phone by the court order. No other phones will be affected. Maybe the FBI findls out others who are mixed up in these killings and possibly save other Americans. The info. can be written down and handed over to the FBI and then Apple can destroy that one phone.

No. The FBI is not asking Apple to "crack a code". The FBI is asking Apple to write a new operating system that they can install on this one phone so that the FBI can crack the code without it a) self destructing, which it is configured to do after 10 failed passcode attempts, and b) imposing a delay after each failed attempt which could cause the FBI to take years to break the encryption. Apple's concern is that a) the new OS could be stolen by Apple or FBI employees or hackers, which essentially causes a massive number of iphones in existance to be compromised, and b) they shouldn't have to write a new OS for every single investigation.

[WuDrWu]

I'm not a tech guy.....why can't Apple unlock this one phone and give it back to the FBI?

[MoValley John]

Why are they right? My understanding is that all that is being asked is to break the code on this one phone by the court order. No other phones will be affected. Maybe the FBI findls out others who are mixed up in these killings and possibly save other Americans. The info. can be written down and handed over to the FBI and then Apple can destroy that one phone.

Because, as I understand it, Apple is being told they must build a tool which doesn't exist. From what I understand, the government is demanding that Apple design code that Apple doesn't want created, not for the Government, not for Apple and not for hackers. There is not a back door on the iPhone and Apple intends to keep it that way, the government is not telling Apple open up a phone through code that exists, the government is telling Apple they must invent it.

Now, if I have been misinformed and Apple currently has a tool to open a back door into the iPhone to retrieve data and they are simply telling the govt. that they won't open the phone, then I would side with the govt. What I understand is that Apple has the ability to reset locked phones, but does not have the ability to reset a locked phone and retrieve the data. The government is trying to compel Apple to write code that, by Apple security design, does not exist.

[MoValley John]

In other words, the government told Apple to give them a product. Apple replied that they don't have the product, that it doesn't exist, then the government subpoenaed Apple, demanding that they build it for them.

[shockmonster]

I'm not a tech guy.....why can't Apple unlock this one phone and give it back to the FBI?

From what I've read, they can. But instead, Apple wants to be similar to the Swiss banks and protect their product/secrecy at all costs thereby protecting profits at the cost of possible lives to terror.

Apples defense is a red herring. Profits protecting is their goal from what I've read.

[shockmonster]

In other words, the government told Apple to give them a product. Apple replied that they don't have the product, that it doesn't exist, then the government subpoenaed Apple, demanding that they build it for them.

They didn't ask them for a product. They asked Apple for the information in that one phone.

[Kung Wu]

I'm not a tech guy.....why can't Apple unlock this one phone and give it back to the FBI?

It cannot be unlocked. An encryption code will have to be broken to get any information from it. But before the FBI can break the encryption there are two mechanisms built in that prevent one from even breaking encryption: 1) a self destruct -- after 10 guesses the phone is automatically wiped clean. It could take billions of guesses (or much more) to break the encryption, and 2) a delay between attempts to break the encryption.

FBI needs Apple to make a new version of the operating system that will prevent the phone from wiping itself after 10 guesses, and remove the delay. The delay could cause the FBIs attempt to break the encryption go from months to decades.

[Kung Wu]

They didn't ask them for a product. They asked Apple for the information in that one phone.

No they didnt. They asked for a product.

The FBI will break the encryption once Apple supplies an operating system (product) that let's them break the encryption.

Edit: Well they asked for both, but they have complied with the information delivery to the best of their ability. The controversy is surrounding the operating system issue, which is required to allow the FBI to do what it does.

Edit edit: Essentially, it takes a new operating system in order to comply with the subpoena. The FBI is fine with that. Apple thinks that's overreaching.

[MoValley John]

No they didnt. They asked for a product.

The FBI will break the encryption once Apple supplies an operating system (product) that let's them break the encryption.

Edit: Well they asked for both, but they have complied with the information delivery to the best of their ability. The controversy is surrounding the operating system issue, which is required to allow the FBI to do what it does.

Edit edit: Essentially, it takes a new operating system in order to comply with the subpoena. The FBI is fine with that. Apple thinks that's overreaching.

I think you are close. The FBI asked Apple to open the one phone and give them the data. Apple replied that they couldn't do that, the phone was built without a back door to make accessing the data, as the FBI wants, impossible. The FBI then went to court to demand that Apple design and prosuce a code that will allow the phone to be opened and data retrieved. Apple doesn't currently have the ability to retrieve the data and doesn't want to even attempt to write the code that could open the phone.