Government pushed Apple to act as long before San Bernardino


#1

[Read the post]


#2

in the end the only answer will be completely un-crackable software. There must be a way for apple to get in there or no one would be asking right? I mean, Apple isn’t saying we “can’t” do that. They are saying we 'won’t" do that. Constitutionally the only limit is whether they have a warrant and they do have a warrant… But if it’s technically possible they force apple to do it right? I don’t agree with it but legally, if it’s possible they can force them right? So the only work around is making software that even apple literally cannot hack even if they put their best people on it…


#3

The way law enforcement whines about encryption, makes me wonder how they ever got their job done before we all carried our personal information and communications around with us in our back pockets.

Is police work dead? Or has it just gotten lazy?


#4

Is this really the first mass shooter who used encryption?

Or just the first Muslim?

I don’t recall hearing about the contents of phones used by other American monsters mass murderers.


#5

5C. The NYT got it wrong, too:

[quote=“NYT”]Correction: February 18, 2016
An earlier version of this article misidentified the iPhone model of the shooter Syed Rizwan Farook. It was a 5c, not a 5s.[/quote]


#6

You got it. If the shooters had been ‘Christians’ and white, the Feds probably wouldn’t care.


#7

That’s contradicted even by the summary. The feds have been caring about unlocking phones for some time, but this is the case they thought had the best chance in the court of public opinion.


#8

Is police work dead? Or has it just gotten lazy?

I’m pretty sure we can have both


#9

It seems that as information gathering and surveillance tools have gotten better, and weapons and tactics have become more militarized, the authoritarian control freaks who have always been present in law enforcement - but often reined in and frustrated - have become dominant.

It’s no longer about policework, it is about the control of potential insurgents in hostile territory.


#10

Why is that case not going forward?


#11

To my ears, this quote read exactly like that old chestnut of, “there’s this bomb ticking away, right, and the guy who built it is right there, and he won’t tell you the code to stop it, so basically you have to break his knees…”:

“They need to figure that out now before there is that bigger body count. So this is as good a test case as any to have that fight,” said Ron Hosko, who until 2014 led the F.B.I.’s criminal division. “Crack that thing for me now, Tim Cook, because it’s only going to get worse.”

#12

Couldn’t the FBI also make Colt hack their AR-15s so that terrorists can’t fire them?


#13

No. But a private company put a Christian bible verse on one to discourage use by terrorists. Stupid, IMHO.


#14

Apple is saying “no, we won’t even attempt it” and then lists the reasons. One of the biggest is that the requested tool does not exist, and iOS was designed to not allow such tools. So even if they tried, success was not guaranteed.

A less principled company might take the phone pretend to try, and either do a song and dance about “we’re working on it” forever or brick it and say “oops”.


#15

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.