It saddens me that my personal favourite part of this story -- that he has said that he will eat his own shoe on live television if he doesn't manage to break into the phone -- has been omitted from this article. =(
Knowing who the shooters were in communication with (especially around the time of the shooting) could help pinpoint individuals who have connections with ISIS and/or other terror groups.Darth_Payn said:They're still trying to unlock he San Bernardino shooters' iPhone? What do they care? They're dead!
Exactly! If the FBI wants just that one iPhone unlocked and Apple's saying "NO!", then they're coming off as babies and the FBI's being reasonable, just unable to do their jobs.WhiteTigerShiro said:Knowing who the shooters were in communication with (especially around the time of the shooting) could help pinpoint individuals who have connections with ISIS and/or other terror groups.Darth_Payn said:They're still trying to unlock he San Bernardino shooters' iPhone? What do they care? They're dead!
Oh, you were arguing the other side (to be fair you were kinda vague). The point is that if they create tech that can unlock one iPhone, then it can unlock ANY iPhone. If Apple complies with what the FBI wants, it'll basically be their death warrant. All it'll take at that point is a rumor that the tech to unlock iPhones was leaked and people will mass exodus from Apple products. Even worse if it actually DOES leak.Darth_Payn said:Exactly! If the FBI wants just that one iPhone unlocked and Apple's saying "NO!", then they're coming off as babies and the FBI's being reasonable, just unable to do their jobs.WhiteTigerShiro said:Knowing who the shooters were in communication with (especially around the time of the shooting) could help pinpoint individuals who have connections with ISIS and/or other terror groups.Darth_Payn said:They're still trying to unlock he San Bernardino shooters' iPhone? What do they care? They're dead!
I don't know what John McAfee was rambling about, but I don't speak "crazy person".
Now you are claiming the backdoor does not count because it will not be released to the FBI.HomuraDidNothinWrong said:Theres no back door involved.
Actually FastJack was born in 1999. Sorry, pendantic shadowrun fan here.Makabriel said:Sorry, man. FastJack won't be born for another 20 years or so..Anti-American Eagle said:Of course the FBI aren't hiring people like that. They're smart enough to train their own people before they go looking for shadowrunners.PatrickJS said:"Because the FBI will not hire anyone with a 24-inch purple mohawk, 10-gauge ear piercings, and a tattooed face who demands to smoke weed while working and won't work for less than a half-million dollars a year. But you bet your ass that the Chinese and Russians are hiring similar people with similar demands and have been for many years. It's why we are decades behind in the cyber race."
Legal precedent is set. Apple lost the case. They're appealing. But until then its set. And theres no back door requirement. They're allowed to flash a custom firmware for that one specific phone, keep the phone, give the FBI the data from the phone without letting them touch the physical phone so they cant figure out a way to duplicate the custom firmware, and then destroy the phone. That is not a back door, thats them using their encryption key to open it.TechNoFear said:You are trying to move the goal posts...
I responded to your post mocking other posters because you think that;
Now you are claiming the backdoor does not count because it will not be released to the FBI.HomuraDidNothinWrong said:Theres no back door involved.
You also do not appear to understand that this will set a legal precedent.