Thoughts on the FBI vs Apple situation?

[DoYouKubuntu]

Just wondering what everyone thinks about the FBI vs Apple situation, i.e., the fact that the FBI wants Apple to write programs to allow them to unlock a phone that was used by one of the San Bernardino terrorists, and Apple's refusal (thus far) to do so.

I'm REALLY split on this.

On the one hand, I feel strongly that Apple should comply. Their reasoning against doing so involves the whole concept of letting loose a "back door" that will be used by criminals and other bad people indiscriminately. I disagree. As I see it, they could safeguard it with extraordinary security, such as not storing it on any device that's connected to anything else (such as the Internet or a wireless network). They could insist that the FBI come to them, and only allow use of the program(s) on their campus.

But, on the other hand, I kind of see Apple's point, i.e., they've worked hard at making their products secure, and anything that undermines that security can be seen as a problem.

So I don't know. What are your thoughts?

[Qqmike]

As many of you know, I lean way left (liberal, USA style) on most issues. However, on this issue, I say the FBI rules. It's a not-so-brave new world now, and it's probably gonna get worse before--and if--it gets better, with losers everywhere claiming dogmatic, credo, religious rights to terrorize the innocent. When it comes to this, and to national security, to hell with privacy issues. It's war. We must do what we must do--whether it's the FBI, NSA, CIA, Special Forces, or any US agency trying to fight this war, trying to protect us, working to prosecute (or remove) the cowards. Do you think Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and the rest are sitting around formulating and respecting bleeding-heart, principled privacy issues when it comes to this war? Survival rules--ours, and then the species. Yeah, on this issue, at first, I felt split, too, DYK, until--as you may have noticed--I hereby un-split myself and I draw the line.

[Snowhog]

I support Apple's position fully.

[MoonRise]

I'm like DYK. Split. I agree on the point that it should be handled at Apple's labs and their labs only. They control the Key and they are responsible for it if it leaks. The onus would be on them yes, but it is their product after all.

@ Q: you are correct. Those entities you list do not hold back and they so admit it in their actions. That is what makes them dangerous.

[whatthefunk]

I side with Apple. If they make a backdoor into their product, eventually it will be exploited. Even if they keep it in an underground vault guarded 24 hours a day by a private army and only allow a select handful of trusted people to access it, eventually there will be a slip. Im sure selling such a thing on the black market would make the seller a huge profit.

[DoYouKubuntu]

Great comments so far!

To expand a little on my earlier comment about safeguarding any program(s) written for this particular task: I don't see why it/they couldn't just be destroyed once the FBI has finished using them. That way there's no need for 24/7 armed guards from now to infinity, you know?

BUT...and see this comes back to being split on it...from things I've been reading it seems there are a LOT of other law enforcement requests for programs like this. I guess we're hearing about the FBI case because the attack in San Bernardino was such a big thing, and it's still fresh in people's memory and everything. So should Apple (or any other phone's OS people) comply with ALL of these requests? If not, why not? But if they do, there's that back door danger again. Damn!

[MoonRise]

I side with Apple. If they make a backdoor into their product, eventually it will be exploited. Even if they keep it in an underground vault guarded 24 hours a day by a private army and only allow a select handful of trusted people to access it, eventually there will be a slip. Im sure selling such a thing on the black market would make the seller a huge profit.

Good point there!

[DoYouKubuntu]

Good point there!

Unless it's destroyed after its intended use.

[whatthefunk]

Unless it's destroyed after its intended use.

It sets a precedent though. It opens the door to the federal government being allowed to access your private data. In this case, they are accessing it for supposed national security reasons because the attacks were linked to terrorism. So in future cases, Apple and other tech companies will have to comply with federal orders to unlock their devices when national security is a concern. Where do you draw the 'national security' line? At what point does something become a national security concern? Who gets to decide this? Thats a very slippery slope.

[claydoh]

it is hard to wade through the mess around this.
From what I can determine, the FBI wants Apple to write or modify the version of iOS on this particular phone, not to decrypt it, but to turn off the extra features that keep them from doing a "brute force " attack- the limit on unlock attempts, the expanding amount of time between them, and the eventual wiping of the phone. They are not asking apple to open it up, but to make it (a little) easier to take the time to run every password combination possible through the device in order to unlock it.

Then there is this:
http://recode.net/2016/02/19/san-ber...fter-shooting/
http://recode.net/2016/02/21/fbi-say...not-a-screwup/

This could be the reason why the FBI wants Apple to write code to circumvent or remove these features to begin with. The phone in question is owned by the employer, San Bernardino County Department of Public Health

While my first thought is that Apple should assist, as this is a specific case with a specific device for a specific person, and is not actually decrypting the device or providing a 'back door". Once the cat is out of the bag it will be used elsewhere, on individually owned phones.

Apple is defending itself as it should, but I doubt it is for any altruistic reasons. Not bashing them because of who they are, but most companies and corporations fight for things that are in their self interest, and is perfectly natural.

The fact that Malik and Farook apparently used burner phones and took at least some pains to remove themselves from the digital world makes me put on my amateur conspiracy theorist hat on and wonder if the password reset was done just to get this to court so that some other iPhones that they have can be opened up easier.

[Qqmike]

whatthefunk: tech companies will have to comply with federal orders to unlock their devices when national security is a concern. Where do you draw the 'national security' line? At what point does something become a national security concern? Who gets to decide this? Thats a very slippery slope.

I agree and see your very good point. But that hits on my point. We don't (yet) live in the "best of all possible worlds." In fact, ours is presently far from perfect, as it seems almost nothing in society is working to everyone's satisfaction. The timing of our technological progress sucks as it coincides with the increase in radical terrorism (or is it a chicken-or-egg issue? i.e., has technology played into the expansion of terrorism?). We created this technology, and now we must scramble to deal with it--adjust it to fit in with people and our system.

But without security, we may not have survival, and without survival, we have nothing. I say, in the meantime, let's make errors on the side of survival, possibly risking some privacy to do so as the "agencies" scramble to protect us. Let's face it, if the agencies do overstep reasonable bounds, the system will eventually catch the transgression and bring the agencies to justice--all serving as incremental steps to make the technology fit into our lives and national security. IOW, the discussion (and sequential resolution(s)) will evolve naturally.

[kubicle]

Unless it's destroyed after its intended use.

Sure. And then you only need to kill everyone that designed and wrote the software (and those who know how it works)...and repeat the whole process the next time the government comes knocking on the door. That seems like a rational sacrifice to make even if that doesn't really make the technology 100% secure either...industrial espionage (or whistle blowers) could reveal the details before we got to kill them.

Survival rules--ours, and then the species.

Seriously? You would readily sacrifice the privacy (a human right) of everyone for the sake of the threat that terrorism poses to the survival of the species? And it really isn't all about privacy either, it would also loosen security (access to your house alarm and to the locations of your family are some possibilities that come to mind immediately).

As far as survival goes, terrorism is a ridiculously small problem. Recently, over the whole world, terrorism attacks are responsible for roughly 30 000 deaths annually (and a negligible amount of those outside warring regions in the Middle-East, Africa and Afghanistan...mostly regions that [some parts of] the western world had a hand in unstabilizing...before that the terrorism death toll was only a few thousands annually.)

To put that into perspective (of the survival of general populace or in fact the species), here's a small sample of death tolls:
world, annually (terrorism) ~30 000
world, annually (all causes): ~58 000 000
world, *hourly* (all causes): ~6 300
world, annually (car accidents): ~1 200 000
world, annually (suicides): ~800 000
world, annually (cancer) ~7 000 000

And some numbers for the U.S.:
U.S., annually (car accidents): ~32 000
U.S., annually (suicides): ~38 000
U.S., annually (gun homicides): ~11 000

(more numbers here: http://waitbutwhy.com/2013/08/the-de...breakdown.html)

So no, terrorism doesn't really make a dent in the survival of the species.

And if survival is the only thing to care about, why don't we put surveillance cameras in every home to prevent suicides and put everyone on house arrest to prevent car accidents while we're at it (that would probably prevent roughly 20 000 annual U.S. seasonal influenza deaths as well). I mean who needs human rights like privacy or freedom if they can feel safe...not necessarily be safe, but feel safe.

So yes, I'm with Apple (and probably for the first time in my life).

EDIT: And yes, as far as survival of the species is concerned, an even bigger problem than all these things that kill us by the millions, is probably the over-population of the earth.

[Qqmike]

Good points, kubicle.

Details ...

Suicides. I never understood that one. Someone wishes to exercise an exit choice, leave them be to do it. Does that cost or hurt the rest of us?

Overpopulation. Yes, that's the biggie. And that is a matter of education, IMO. We are 7 billion and the Earth (resources) may be good for 9 billion. We are close to facing this issue.

Survival, ours and the species: It may FEEL like we are in trouble now and then. We sure reacted to the World Trade Center, 9/11. I can think of other national landmarks that, if destroyed by terrorists, would trigger one hell of a response from Americans, even if only a relatively "few" dies (in the context of your macro-statistics). Or what if freeways were randomly attacked in some way, or airlines (already an issue under study)?

Risk: Maybe thus far terrorism doesn't pose a great probabilistic risk to me, to you, to others we know. But it could get to that point, even if only a relatively small percent of people are actually attacked. Include domestic terrorism. Do you want to have full privacy preserved; or do want to sacrifice some of your privacy so you feel safe in a shopping mall or at home or driving on a freeway?

Of course, personally, I happen to feel that we should not all be spilling our guts (in detail) by means of Facebook, the social media sites, and our i-thingies. People already are choosing to sacrifice a helluva lot of their personal, family, work/professional, and consumer-behavior privacy.

[NickStone]

Having read the comments in this tread, do you who are supporting the authorities request to have phones/computers unlocked so that they can see what their citizens have been up to, except what is being planned in the UK by the (right wing) Conservative run Government?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6900566.html

[MoonRise]

Overpopulation. Yes, that's the biggie.

That's what is driving this current society we live in now.