Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg side with FBI in IPhone backdoor case

[spellmanuk]

10 minutes ago, Sunshine1868 said:

The only way for these security features can be bypassed is by rewriting iOS. 

The only "key" that decrypts the device is the users passcode. that is the way the system is designed.

apple has a signing key that they use to verify iOS updates if you try to downgrade your iPhone right now it will not work as apple only sign the newest versions of iOS in order for the FBI to get this modifyed version of iOS into the iPhone apple need to sign it to say that its validated otherwise you just get an error saying that it didn't work 

[GoodBytes]

4 minutes ago, Sunshine1868 said:

Where might this code for the lock screen security reside, hmm?   They have to alter iOS. they have to alter multiple places in the code for the different functionalities (how the lock screen accepts password attempts, how many attempts the security section will allow, disabling the wipe feature in a another place in the security section)

 

Its not like they write 3 if/else/than statements and *poof* magically everything works.

 

There are likely hundreds of lines of code that would need to be deleted/changed/added in iOS to make this all work.

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

You initially were saying that the iOS needs to be rewritten, like if it something grandiose, like a ground up. It doesn't.

[Sunshine1868]

3 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

You initially were saying that the iOS needs to be rewritten, like if it something grandiose, like a ground up. It doesn't.

It doesn't need to be ground-up, but there will be a lot of work* re-coding iOS to skirt these security features.

 

The fact is, it doesn't matter if it's Joe Blow down the street or the FBI, NOBODY should get access to anybody's data because the security features of iOS have been crippled.

 

*it doesn't seem like much, but would you like to volunteer to go through all that code to find, change, check, and compile it all? If no, then don't say it's easy.

[spellmanuk]

1 minute ago, GoodBytes said:

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

You initially were saying that the iOS needs to be rewritten, like if it something grandiose, like a ground up. It doesn't.

there would be a significant amount of code that would need to be redone its not just a case of simply changing the time out counter and like @Sunshine1868 said once theres a back door theres a back door and someone else will work out a way to do it if apple made this back door in the "one time" case i mean people have hacked into the pentagon with less

[givingtnt]

idk, as far as im concerned, I don't have anything to hide (I don'T use an iphone either, but thats not the question) and most times I don't go the "one button buy" options with things like paypal or anything. so im not the kind of guy thats really concerned.

I am not with the idea, though im not in the "worse idea ever" clan either.
it has advantages, and it has disadvantages that can be alternativly blocked or fixed. 

[Sunshine1868]

2 minutes ago, givingtnt said:

idk, as far as im concerned, I don't have anything to hide (I don'T use an iphone either, but thats not the question) and most times I don't go the "one button buy" options with things like paypal or anything. so im not the kind of guy thats really concerned.

I am not with the idea, though im not in the "worse idea ever" clan either.
it has advantages, and it has disadvantages that can be alternativly blocked or fixed. 

Dude, the whole ordeal about the "precedent being set" is that the Gov't could require ALL device manufacturers to put this sort of backdoor in their devices. your android device, your mac, your windows computer, etc. 

 

this really is an issue for anybody who uses a password protected device.

[givingtnt]

1 minute ago, Sunshine1868 said:

Dude, the whole ordeal about the "precedent being set" is that the Gov't could require ALL device manufacturers to put this sort of backdoor in their devices. your android device, your mac, your windows computer, etc. 

 

this really is an issue for anybody who uses a password protected device.

like I said, the device I own is out of the discussion (for the reason you mentionned) although, like I also said, there are ways around this. more easely on android than iphone tho. but still, where there is a will, there is a way.

[Sunshine1868]

Just now, givingtnt said:

like I said, the device I own is out of the discussion (for the reason you mentionned) 

...no device is out of the discussion...? the outcome of this situation could have extreme results that affect everyone

[givingtnt]

Just now, Sunshine1868 said:

...no device is out of the discussion...? the outcome of this situation could have extreme results that affect everyone

I ment the device I have , since I precised that I had an android device

I ment that it could and will happen with other devices. not that they are excluded and not relevent to the problem !

[GoodBytes]

The purpose of warrants is that your right are temporarily relinquished for a certain task.

The warrant allows the police (and related departments such as the FBI), to go to your home go through all your stuff, take what they want, access what they want, and ask you for all passwords. Refusing will result in you being charged for obstructing of justice (that is why criminals, go "Oh I forgot my password that I enter daily on my computer, LOLz!", to not have that additional charge put on them.

 

By law, Apple has no choice to obey. The only problem why no one is being arrested, is that you can't arrest a company (well Corporation to be exact). Corporation is considered a person in the U.S and in Canada. Not the people that work inside.

[stconquest]

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

The purpose of warrants is that your right are temporarily relinquished for a certain task.

The warrant allows the police (and related departments such as the FBI), to go to your home go through all your stuff, take what they want, access what they want, and ask you for all passwords. Refusing will result in you being charged for obstructing of justice (that is why criminals, go "Oh I forgot my password that I enter daily on my computer, LOLz!", to not have that additional charge put on them.

 

By law, Apple has no choice to obey. The only problem why no one is being arrested, is that you can't arrest a company (well Corporation to be exact). Corporation is considered a person in the U.S and in Canada. Not the people that work inside.

With all due respect:  O' rly?

 

What did Apple do to break the law?  What charges would be laid against Apple?  Is it because they might refuse to do free work? 

 

If they had the data available to them, you might have a point.  Apparently they do not have the process in their possession, so what the gov't is effectively asking is for is slave labor under the threat of law?  What?  Apple did not kill anyone, they don't have to do shit for free.

 

Forgive me if I took your post out of context, I am too lazy to go back.

[Misanthrope]

4 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

You initially were saying that the iOS needs to be rewritten, like if it something grandiose, like a ground up. It doesn't.

That sounds fairly reasonable, but still a huge liability: courts and judges can be wrong and the key has a chance (however small) of being obtained or replicated. If you design a wall with a fail point, as much as you try to secure said fail point it's still overall weakened vs no fail point at all.

[Spongy141]

Good Job Apple, who cares that someone is running loose that killed 14 people along side the man the F.B.I. captured, we need to protect the stupid iPhone for the most pointless reason possible, its not like they could just patch the backdoor they made in a later version of iOS, no that would be too smart for Apple, they need to bitch about having to help anyone but themselves. Maybe if the F.B.I. were willing to give money to Apple, granted Apple would obviously make the deal overpriced, then Apple would do it, and still bitch about it.

[stconquest]

This guy nails it on the head, go back to 26:30:

 

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/25/former_cia_agent_says_edward_snowden

[dalekphalm]

13 hours ago, Spongy141 said:

Good Job Apple, who cares that someone is running loose that killed 14 people along side the man the F.B.I. captured, we need to protect the stupid iPhone for the most pointless reason possible, its not like they could just patch the backdoor they made in a later version of iOS, no that would be too smart for Apple, they need to bitch about having to help anyone but themselves. Maybe if the F.B.I. were willing to give money to Apple, granted Apple would obviously make the deal overpriced, then Apple would do it, and still bitch about it.

You realize that the "perp" is dead, right? He's not running loose at all. Since, he was shot and killed.

[Sunshine1868]

14 hours ago, Spongy141 said:

Good Job Apple, who cares that someone is running loose that killed 14 people along side the man the F.B.I. captured, we need to protect the stupid iPhone for the most pointless reason possible, its not like they could just patch the backdoor they made in a later version of iOS, no that would be too smart for Apple, they need to bitch about having to help anyone but themselves. Maybe if the F.B.I. were willing to give money to Apple, granted Apple would obviously make the deal overpriced, then Apple would do it, and still bitch about it.

 

[Spongy141]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

You realize that the "perp" is dead, right? He's not running loose at all. Since, he was shot and killed.

You realize there was two of them right?

[Sunshine1868]

5 minutes ago, Spongy141 said:

You realize there WERE two of them right?

^FTFY

 

They are both dead.

[CJPowell27]

Laughable coming from the creators of Facebook and Microsoft, Facebooks privacy statements are alarming as is the data collection of Windows 10

[SSL]

On 2/23/2016 at 9:59 AM, GoodBytes said:

Bill Gates suggests a balance, which Apple can do. such as they get the phone, they decrypt it with their master key, and give the data, and not build a backdoor for the FBI to have carte blanch on everything, as FBI wants

 

You do realize that in encryption that there is no such thing as a "master key"? Or, more accurately, that a "master key" for any encryption system is the definition of a back door?

 

It should be made clear that in the current version of iOS, the back door already exists: that is, the ability to replace the operating system with one that allows for unlimited guesses with no timeout. If Apple does not fix this issue as they intend, it will be exploited; and perhaps already has been. All the FBI wants here is for apple to write the exploit for them, thereby entrenching the precedent of compelling companies to comply with government-sanctioned requests to secured data in the name of national security.

 

It is not possible to design a back door or "master key" that can only be used by one party in one situation. If Apple can do it then the government can do it then the criminals and terrorists do it; weaker encryption makes us all more vulnerable to the worst case scenario. Yes, it's easy to be sympathetic to the need of law enforcement to secure intelligence, but it's been consistently demonstrated that weakening security for this purpose is not a viable strategy. This scenario you are describing where Apple uses the master key and passes on the decrypted information to the authorities is a fantasy.

 

Really, the framing of this issue is all wrong; the media and the public, to say nothing of the government, are fixating on the dichotomy of "National Security vs Privacy". Instead, we should be viewing this issue through the lens of "Security vs Surveillance"; if we don't, we're all worse off.

 

On 2/24/2016 at 1:30 PM, GoodBytes said:

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

lol, no.

[Gibs960]

For once I agree with Apple, being able to access one iPhone, I think, would lead to accessing them all eventually. 

[SSL]

Just now, Gibs960 said:

For once I agree with Apple, being able to access one iPhone, I think, would lead to accessing them all eventually. 

 

It would lead to them accessing any and all phones immediately. This is a serious and imminent security liability. The question is not if Apple complies with the FBI, but rather who exploits it first.

[Stuff_]

On 2/24/2016 at 3:30 PM, GoodBytes said:

Nha. it is quiet simple. All they have to do is not increment the counter for the number of tries (if it detects the that it is the FBI). The only thing they need to add, is something to detect that it is only the FBI, like a lightning connector USB flash drive style thing you plug. Apple might even keep it and do it to make sure that there is a valid warrant.

 

You initially were saying that the iOS needs to be rewritten, like if it something grandiose, like a ground up. It doesn't.

You're suggesting something that had been programmed to circumvent security measures.

That is a vulnerability that you've immediately introduced.

 

Apple is trying to figure out a way around it, but nothing reasonable has been discovered.

[Sharp_3yE]

On 2/24/2016 at 1:34 PM, Sunshine1868 said:

It doesn't need to be ground-up, but there will be a lot of work* re-coding iOS to skirt these security features.

 

The fact is, it doesn't matter if it's Joe Blow down the street or the FBI, NOBODY should get access to anybody's data because the security features of iOS have been crippled.

 

*it doesn't seem like much, but would you like to volunteer to go through all that code to find, change, check, and compile it all? If no, then don't say it's easy.

That isn't true. If there is a warrant then the FBI does have the right to gather your information. That's all that is going on. A gathering of information. Bank account info gets gathered when police or FBI need someones info. Computers get seized for their info. Lots of stuff does. A phone is one of those things that can be taken if there is a warrant. No one thinks this one phone shouldn't be opened. The problem is giving the FBI access at any time or putting in a back door which anyone could potentially figure out.

23 minutes ago, CJPowell27 said:

Laughable coming from the creators of Facebook and Microsoft, Facebooks privacy statements are alarming as is the data collection of Windows 10

Read the first page of comments. I really wish the OP would update his original post. There was an interview with Bill Gates where he said he was disippointed with the headlines that say he supports the FBI. It's more complicated then that. I believe he just thinks Apple should help get this one iphone open. It's not like he wants every iphone to have a back door.

18 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

It would lead to them accessing any and all phones immediately. This is a serious and imminent security liability. The question is not if Apple complies with the FBI, but rather who exploits it first.

 

[SSL]

1 minute ago, TheCMan said:

The problem is giving the FBI access at any time or putting in a back door which anyone could potentially figure out.

 

It's not like he wants every iphone to have a back door.

 

How many times do I need to say it? iOS already has a back door. The government is forcing Apple to exploit the back door rather than doing it themselves for a variety of reasons, but nonetheless the back door is there, exploitable, right now.