Apple is fighting the FBI
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Since code is speech, forcing someone to code would violate free speech.
I've heard this before, but I'm not sure on the court's opinion on the matter. But assuming they agree with you - how is this case not already thrown out?
Because it hasn't actually made it to court yet?
That too, no court involved.
OK good point Dafyre.
If Apple takes it to court, the FBI needs time to find the right judges that owe them favors, etc, etc...
How can Apple not?
Why would Apple do that? Until Apple is taken to court, they don't need to do anything. Not Apple's position to take someone to court.
Right. I think in this case, the FBI would have to sue Apple into submission, and Apple, in this case, would fight it and they would wind up in court that way.
Exactly. There is no court order, just he FBI trying to pressure them into doing something the court isn't willing to let the FBI do.
Are you sure there is no court order? I'll see what I can find.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Since code is speech, forcing someone to code would violate free speech.
I've heard this before, but I'm not sure on the court's opinion on the matter. But assuming they agree with you - how is this case not already thrown out?
Because it hasn't actually made it to court yet?
That too, no court involved.
OK good point Dafyre.
If Apple takes it to court, the FBI needs time to find the right judges that owe them favors, etc, etc...
How can Apple not?
Why would Apple do that? Until Apple is taken to court, they don't need to do anything. Not Apple's position to take someone to court.
Apple is currently under a court order to make software and put that software on the device in question. Apple isn't going to sue anyone.. they, hopefully, are going to appeal the court order to do that stuff.
Can't sue courts (actually can't sue any government agency.) That's a flaw of the law in the US, the government is not under the law.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Since code is speech, forcing someone to code would violate free speech.
I've heard this before, but I'm not sure on the court's opinion on the matter. But assuming they agree with you - how is this case not already thrown out?
Because it hasn't actually made it to court yet?
That too, no court involved.
OK good point Dafyre.
If Apple takes it to court, the FBI needs time to find the right judges that owe them favors, etc, etc...
How can Apple not?
Why would Apple do that? Until Apple is taken to court, they don't need to do anything. Not Apple's position to take someone to court.
Apple is currently under a court order to make software and put that software on the device in question. Apple isn't going to sue anyone.. they, hopefully, are going to appeal the court order to do that stuff.
True. Appealing the court order is what will be required for them to not have to do that. Which could take months before it even lands in a court room.
-
In court papers, the Justice Department has assured the federal magistrate judge who ordered Apple to unlock the phone that after the software serves its purpose — letting the FBI try as many passcodes as it needs to get in without wiping the contents — Apple may “destroy it … refuse to disseminate it outside of Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other devices or users without lawful court orders.”
The order, signed Tuesday by a magistrate judge in Riverside, Calif., does not ask Apple to break the phone’s encryption but rather to disable the feature that wipes the data on the phone after 10 incorrect tries at entering a password. That way, the government can try to crack the password using “brute force” — attempting tens of millions of combinations without risking the deletion of the data.
-
@Dashrender said:
“destroy it … refuse to disseminate it outside of Apple and make clear to the world that it does not apply to other devices or users without lawful court orders.”
Most everyone agrees this one isn't a lawful court order. So that's total BS right there.
-
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
-
That way, the government can try to crack the password using “brute force” — attempting tens of millions of combinations without risking the deletion of the data.
Which is hilarious, it's my understand is that it's a 4 digit pin, not a password, so there are only 10,000 option, not millions. LOL
-
What's likely going to happen here is Apple is going to be forced to do it by the freedom-hating mob mentality of the public, and they will find that there is nothing on the phone and the whole thing will have been for no purpose other than to erode American freedom and protections.
-
@Dashrender said:
That way, the government can try to crack the password using “brute force” — attempting tens of millions of combinations without risking the deletion of the data.
Which is hilarious, it's my understand is that it's a 4 digit pin, not a password, so there are only 10,000 option, not millions. LOL
But they can try each, many times.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What's likely going to happen here is Apple is going to be forced to do it by the freedom-hating mob mentality of the public, and they will find that there is nothing on the phone and the whole thing will have been for no purpose other than to erode American freedom and protections.
Sadly someone at my poker table last night asked if the killer was an American citizen or not. and if they were, WTF, why wasn't Apple unlocking the phone - clearly he does not understand what is at stake... and the FBI and everyone else is just waiting for this.
Apparently there are another dozen cases very similar to this one in adjudication right now. The FBI picked this one to push hard on because they knew they could get the most public support when trying to take down terrorist.
-
@Dashrender said:
Sadly someone at my poker table last night asked if the killer was an American citizen or not. and if they were, WTF, why wasn't Apple unlocking the phone - clearly he does not understand what is at stake... and the FBI and everyone else is just waiting for this.
No reason to think he doesn't understand. Tons of people understand and don't care. Or worse, tons understand and see it as an opportunity to remove freedoms.
-
@Dashrender said:
Apparently there are another dozen cases very similar to this one in adjudication right now. The FBI picked this one to push hard on because they knew they could get the most public support when trying to take down
terroristfreedom.FTFY
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Agreed - the current problem is that the phone (this old version, not sure it applies to iPhone 6 and newer) will update even when locked.
-
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
Much harder to do.
-
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
And Apple has no requirement to tell anyone that they have done it. The government would need to make a slew of new laws to try to head this off at the pass. Once it is released, too late.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BRRABill said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What this does tell us, is that Apple needs to make the lock out in firmware that they cannot update no matter what they do. Take this capability out of their own hands.
Then the government will probably sue them to stop it from being released.
And Apple has no requirement to tell anyone that they have done it. The government would need to make a slew of new laws to try to head this off at the pass. Once it is released, too late.
I was just about to say the same thing. Laws are the only way this could be prevented.
And if they build it into the hardware so it can't be updated via software, then it can't be changed through an software update either. -
WOW!
“If a person is an American citizen or resident, their rights may be appropriately determined by U.S. law, and it seems appropriate for U.S. law to permit the extraterritorial and unilateral reach of a search warrant to that person’s data regardless of where it is located,”
https://www.petri.com/microsoft-exec-testifies-that-legal-conflicts-are-undermining-tech-gains
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
-
@Dashrender said:
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
Bank accounts ARE data.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Wow oh wow I don't agree. For example, the US Gov't can't force Switzerland to hand over bank accounts etc, why would data be any different?
Bank accounts ARE data.
Again, thank you for making my point.
