Apple is fighting the FBI
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I should point out that I don't feel that the FBI is in any way involved in a conspiracy, only that they are generally non-ethical, not law abiding and have no interest in protecting Americans and the results are generally poor because of it. There isn't any organized effort to do something big and awful, just lots of people looking to gain power and don't care why they hurt or put at risk to do so. Nothing like a conspiracy. Not like they are aiding a foreign power intentionally, they just don't care if bad people take advantage of the things that they do.
I have a hard time putting the FBI into that category. Now the NSA - that's a whole other story. I say the NSA is doing exactly what you've proposed above.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I should point out that I don't feel that the FBI is in any way involved in a conspiracy, only that they are generally non-ethical, not law abiding and have no interest in protecting Americans and the results are generally poor because of it. There isn't any organized effort to do something big and awful, just lots of people looking to gain power and don't care why they hurt or put at risk to do so. Nothing like a conspiracy. Not like they are aiding a foreign power intentionally, they just don't care if bad people take advantage of the things that they do.
I have a hard time putting the FBI into that category. Now the NSA - that's a whole other story. I say the NSA is doing exactly what you've proposed above.
The difference would be, I think, that the FBI does good things, too. The NSA, does none. The FBI is a good idea gone bad. The NSA is an openly bad idea from the onset.
-
I wonder what the ratio is for crimes solved to crimes perpetrated by the FBI.
-
@art_of_shred said:
I wonder what the ratio is for crimes solved to crimes perpetrated by the FBI.
Oh man - that would be an awesome stat!
-
Except it would likely be the FBI allowed to produce the stat
-
@Dashrender Or a scary one...
I also wonder if the NSA shares info with the FBI, and if I will be getting a knock at my door in the next 30 minutes.
-
@art_of_shred Well I imagine they've solved more, but a better question is prevented vs solved after the fact. I'm betting prevented is very low. I have all of the episodes of the show FBI Files and can only think of two which involved preventing a crime, keep in mind both were by domestic terrorists or by criminal groups which had already committed many crimes.
-
*hears knocking at @art_of_shred 's door.
-
@dafyre are you with the FBI?
-
@tonyshowoff said:
@art_of_shred Well I imagine they've solved more, but a better question is prevented vs solved after the fact. I'm betting prevented is very low. I have all of the episodes of the show FBI Files and can only think of two which involved preventing a crime, keep in mind both were by domestic terrorists or by criminal groups which had already committed many crimes.
Which would have been stopped simply by having solved the original crimes!
-
@art_of_shred said:
@Dashrender Or a scary one...
I also wonder if the NSA shares info with the FBI, and if I will be getting a knock at my door in the next 30 minutes.
The flow goes like this...
NSA shared to the FBI shares to Chinese hackers
-
@tonyshowoff said:
@art_of_shred Well I imagine they've solved more, but a better question is prevented vs solved after the fact. I'm betting prevented is very low. I have all of the episodes of the show FBI Files and can only think of two which involved preventing a crime, keep in mind both were by domestic terrorists or by criminal groups which had already committed many crimes.
No one (except citizens) wins by crime prevention. It is the same philosophy as to why we don't invest in maintaining infrastructure. You make more money by solving crime then stopping it before it happens.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@art_of_shred said:
@Dashrender Or a scary one...
I also wonder if the NSA shares info with the FBI, and if I will be getting a knock at my door in the next 30 minutes.
The flow goes like this...
NSA shared to the FBI shares to Chinese hackers
smh
-
@tonyshowoff Exactly !
The NSA was asked to provide numbers on the number of attacks/issues/ whatever you want to call them than they have thwarted, and they couldn't even come up with a lie of a number - instead they simply said - that's national security information and we can't tell you.
-
@scottalanmiller Your edit prevented me making a joke about NASA
-
@Dashrender said:
@tonyshowoff Exactly !
The NSA was asked to provide numbers on the number of attacks/issues/ whatever you want to call them than they have thwarted, and they couldn't even come up with a lie of a number - instead they simply said - that's national security information and we can't tell you.
-
-
OK - So Steve Gibson on Security Now! did a break down of the technology in place around this particular device (and maybe all current iDevices as well).
Each device sends it's unique ID along with a nonce. Apple encrypts those along with the update package using apples private certificate (something we assume is either burned into the device or can only come from a trusted source on the internet for the device to very with the public portion of the cert). The device will then install the update.
The method prevents a package created by the update servers (or a MITM) to present a bad package to the device for installation.
So it's Steve's position that this use of the deployment method that prevents this from being a global problem for these devices.
I'd argue that as long as Apple controls it's certificate that the deployment method would prevent this from being a problem.
But the sure fact that the software exists would simply put Apple right back where they were before the current situation where Apple can't get into the phones.
Places like China could demand that only phones with that version of the software are allowed to be sold inside it's borders. And it could demand it retroactively. Apple would only need to publish this new version to their update servers and when the devices go to get an update, they'll just get this new weaker version.
This is why I think Apple should stand strong and not make this software.
-
@Dashrender said:
Places like China could demand that only phones with that version of the software are allowed to be sold inside it's borders. And it could demand it retroactively. Apple would only need to publish this new version to their update servers and when the devices go to get an update, they'll just get this new weaker version.
.But they can demand that already.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Places like China could demand that only phones with that version of the software are allowed to be sold inside it's borders. And it could demand it retroactively. Apple would only need to publish this new version to their update servers and when the devices go to get an update, they'll just get this new weaker version.
.But they can demand that already.
That's true, I kinda wonder why they haven't?
