Hella respect for apple. I wouldn't imagine they'd actually stick to their philosophies once shit really hit the fan, but here it is!
Apple Refuses FBI Demand to Build a "Backdoor" For iPhones
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
FBI wants a backdoor in ALL iPhones so that they could "liberate" you of your 4th amendment rights.shinyelf said:
Pretty much. As we go into the digital age, should law enforcement have the tools to break open individual digital devices that they have obtained a legal search warrant on? Absolutely.Adam Jensen said:
Do I trust the current US government and its law enforcement/surveillance apparatus to *only* use those tools under the limits of a warrant? Absolutely not. Not after the Patriot Act and the crap we actually have proof that the NSA has been up to. Unless there are hard checks on how and when this can be used, and on the amount of access law enforcement gets to it (and more importantly, hard, unyielding consequences if it is abused), I can't support it.
Where does it say that it has to be a universal exploit for every Iphone handed over to the FBI? Nowhere, that's where. Apple have been ordered to aid the FBI in circumventing the Auto-erase of this particular phone and to ensure that they can access it via a second machine. There is nothing about building in a backdoor on every single device.Adam Jensen said:
Completely besides the point. This is about our civil liberties, and the government overreaching itself.chocolate pickles said:
Who gives a fuck about terrorism? Do people not understand that more people die in gang related crimes in one day, then in a terrorist attack? But wave around the word terrorist, and everybody loses their shit. In the good old days terrorists were labeled for what they were. Criminal organizations. Terrorists can't destroy our country, or take away our freedoms. Government surveillance can. The FBI and NSA are more dangerous to American freedom then the terrorists are.
Anyone who thinks that the government won't abuse this power is naive. We already know that the NSA has used its surveillance for frivalice and immoral purposes that have nothing to do with national security.
Wow. My jaw just hit the goddamn floor. How about all those people narrowly avoided being in the Paris shootings? Or the people who lost family and friends in those attacks? Or, to openly it up more broadly, anyone who was in New York when 9/11 struck.Fox12 said:
This may be one of the most ludicrous things i have ever heard.
Yes, the judges order is to hand over to the FBI the firmware so they can do it themselves; they have been ordered to build and hand over the hammer.shinyelf said:
[footnote]http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/02/judge-apple-must-help-fbi-unlock-san-bernardino-shooters-iphone/[/footnote]
What merit does a protection have if it removes what you're trying to protect?chocolate pickles said:
While I do think governments should do what they can to prevent tragedies, it's an utterly moot point if the only way they can do that is destroy everyone's rights and freedoms in the process.
The government does what it can to protect the people's rights and freedoms. But a government that removes those rights and freedoms are just as much of a problem as whatever the government tries to fight against. That's the point of this discussion.
It's a tragedy when anyone dies. But we need to stop treating terrorists like the boogey man. Pick your jaw off the floor and try putting these things in perspective.chocolate pickles said:
It was a tragedy when 13 people were killed in Columbine, but I don't remember the government creating a program to spy on every citizen in the country without a warrant. It was a tragedy when 12 were killed in Aurora, but I don't remember Lindsey Graham implying that we should be able suspend the right to habeus corpus in order to prevent it. It was a tragedy when dozens of people, mostly children, were killed in Sandy Hook, but I don't remember the government defending torture, or front running politicians arguing for a national registry based on race and religion. The only thing that gets discussed is gun control. But three people die in the Boston Bombing, and the government can declare martial law over the city. Bring up terrorism, and the government can justify everything above, and more. This is very concerning. Do you really believe that this is about protecting you? It's about expanding government powers. What's the point of fighting terrorism if we sacrifice all of our ideals in the process? Here's a fun fact. The government can't protect you. They can't stop every possible eventuality, especially when it involves one gunman going out into a street and firing. We are sacrificing our freedoms, and gain nothing.
This entirely goes against what I saw before, so it seems I have no choice but to admit my mistake. If this is the demand I am slightly more concerned, but even now I don't think it is an entirely bad idea. A phone can tell you a lot about a person, and if you can get a warrant to search a home or a trunk, you should be able to get one to search a phone, whether or not a suspect or victim provides a passcode.kris40k said:
So if the FBI can get a warrant they should be able to unlock someones phone, heck, it seems reasonable that they should be able to remotely access a phone in case it is dumped anywhere. A reasonable stipulation would be that any intrusion leave a clear message, visible to anyone in possession of said phone.
And what the heck, here's a little comic to drive home my point on the liberty and safety issue
http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3005
See, that's part of the problem there. Yes, terrorism is bad. Yes, terrorism is scary. Yes, we should try to bring the people who perpetrate it to justice and do what we can to prevent future incidents.chocolate pickles said:
However. Do you realize how many people in the US die from gun violence each year (over 33,000 people died from gun violence in 2013. 21 died from terrorism related incidents)? Reduce the number of gun violence deaths by 1% and you save something like 330 lives. Literally 15x more people than died in terrorist attack that same year.
Do you know how many thousands of Americans die each year from not having access to proper medical care?
A little over 50 people die from bee stings every year. Bees are objectively more dangerous to Americans than terrorists are, barring a rare, once in a generation sort of event. Hell, the flu killed over 3600 people in 2013.
Compared to things that are regularly killing US citizens, terrorism barely even makes the list. Yeah, it's a tragedy whenever someone gets killed in a terrorist attack, and between 12 and 70 people (about as far as the number shifts most years) is far too many. ...But maybe we can actually address the things killing tens of thousands of people too? Objectively, terrorism is little more than a statistical anomaly in the grand list of "Shit that Kills Americans in Droves.
Well no, I don't quite think that's right. Wouldn't you agree that this is closer to wire tapping? The protection against self incrimination is quite specific in that you cannot be compelled to say anything that would incriminate you but in this case you aren't being compelled to say anything, you're saying what you want, sans coercion and they are merely tracking it. I view this like I would a locked file cabinet. I would support the FBI being given the key if they have a warrant and anything they find in the cabinet is fair game. It's not self incrimination if the FBI cracks your file cabinet and finds your money laundering books. I would oppose the FBI having a universal file cabinet key that it promises it will totally only use once it has a proper court order, totes we swear! But either way, not seeing how this equates to self incrimination in the way the 5th amendment is structured and what it's meant to do.Lightknight said:
I think the problem with terrorism is the intent behind it, not only do the perpetrators intend to kill people, and usually a lot of people, but they also intend to sow fear and destabilize society. A regular shooting death means that someone wanted to kill another person, be it an act of passion or premeditated murder, doesn't really matter. Terrorism is an attempt to hurt not just a person or several, but to hurt society or a nation as a whole.rcs619 said:
So yes, certain measures might be taken to fight terrorism though I believe the ones currently taken are out of bounds.
To be fair, things you did prior to laws changing making said previous acts illegal cannot adversely affect you. They basically can't arrest you for doing something that wasn't illegal when you did it after they make it illegal. Its a fundamental of the way the legal system in the US works. If that aspect changes, guaranteed you won't be worried about privacy anymore, because it will have ceased to exist along with the entire concept of freedom in general as the system will be akin to a dictatorship/police state.Qizx said:
Wrong. VERY VERY WRONG.Abomination said:
I took a cryptology course, alright? And one thing that kept coming up was the mathematical truth of: "If a backdoor exists for the government, the backdoor ALSO exists for the criminal hackers".
And even IF you managed to create a backdoor that literally only the FBI could access because you found a way to make the key a billion characters long and had no accidental security holes...What happens if there's a corrupt official or a double agent or someone else who either sells or copies that key for their own purposes, or just some idiot that uses their personal email to send it to a colleague instead of the secure FBI server email? BAM, suddenly, the entire Iphone network is open to people other than the FBI, most likely criminals.
That's like saying "We should give the cops a special key that unlocks all the doors in the city" and the key is duplicate-able. At that point if one of those cops goes rogue or what-have-you, then it's only a matter of time before the mafia are opening all the doors in the city to steal shit.
You CANNOT make a backdoor for the authorities without leaving it available to the criminal element.
Not to mention that after the bullshit that went down with the NSA where they deliberately bypassed all the checks and balances on them and lied about it, I do not trust the US feds with that kind of power.
Hey, cucumbers. You can have something to hide that's not illegal, or at least innocuous.chocolate pickles said:
For example, a friend of mine is a crossdresser. He has to hide that from his family or they will definitely disown him. Or what if you're an otherwise good politician who is into a weird but harmless fetish that if it gets out will be used to tarnish your reputation and you'll never get elected again? That's stuff that you have to hide because it getting out will ruin you, but none of it is actually illegal.
On another note, would you be fine with the government installing cameras in your shower? I mean, some terrorist types make bombs in their bathtubs, so we REALLY can't take that chance! I mean, you've got nothing to hide, do you? *camera turns to look at your wife/girlfriend/daughter as she showers, or maybe it just zooms in on your crank because this IS the 21st century, after all*
No, but some people definitely do. One guy at my old high school was busted for plagiarism and his dad defended him by going "What? EVERYONE fucking does it. The only problem is that he got caught".LegendaryGamer0 said:
There are a lot of sociopath-inclined people in the world who would indeed commit murder if they knew they could get away with it.
Pretty much. I don't think that I can emphasize this enough but...Fox12 said:
We currently live in a world where Donald Trump is a viable presidential candidate.
Where presidential candidates can brag about how they would torture our enemies even if it doesn't provide any actual intelligence.
Where the idea of barring entry to the country and registering people based on their religion is a popular idea with a chunk of the electorate.
Where we're actually having a discussion about whether or not we should take in refugees trying to flee a war-torn hellscape with whatever family hasn't been murdered yet.
Where the president of the United States himself can order indiscriminate killings via flying death-robots inside the borders of countries we aren't actually at war with.
Where the US accounts for 60% of all military spending IN THE WORLD, but we're still helpless, and terrified and always allegedly on the cusp of being destroyed by a bunch of wanna-be warlords who couldn't even beat Iran in a proper, stand-up war.
It's crazy to see how far off the rails things have gone since 9/11. We're the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the history of humanity, but goddamned are we also an insecure and myopic one too.