• Apple Won't Create 'Backdoor' to Help FBI



    Apple CEO Tim Cook has posted an open letter to Apple customers announcing that the company would oppose an order from a U.S. Federal judge to help the FBI access data on an iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. Cook says that this moment is one for public discussion, and that the company wants its customers to understand what's at stake.

    The White House has taken issue with Apple's suggestion that creating a backdoor to iOS would threaten the security of all its customers, instead arguing that the issue applies to just one iPhone in question.

    In a press briefing on Wednesday, spokesman Josh Earnest said the government does not want Apple to "create a new backdoor to its products," according to Reuters. Instead, he suggested the issue is related to just one case: The December terrorist shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., that resulted in 16 deaths and 24 injuries.

    The White House believes this is about one case, but Apple believes creating a backdoor could set a dangerous precedent.

    "(President Barack Obama) certainly believes that this is an important national priority," Earnest told reporters at the White House.

    Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook himself predicted this argument in his open letter to the public on Wednesday, saying that the government "may argue that its use would be limited to this case." But in Cook's view, "there is no way to guarantee such control."

    From Apple's perspective, creating a tool to access a single iPhone could open the flood gates for future issues rippling well beyond the investigation into the San Bernardino shooting.

    "In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone's physical possession," Cook said.

    The controversy began Tuesday, when a U.S. magistrate judge ordered Apple to comply with FBI requests to help extract data from an iPhone owned by one of the shooters involved in the terrorist attack. The device in question is an iPhone 5c that was password protected by the gunman, and is set to erase a stored decryption key after ten unsuccessful login attempts.

    Original Source
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Apple Won't Create 'Backdoor' to Help FBI started by Caiden Spencer View original post
    Comments 24 Comments
    1. Purple Minion's Avatar
      Purple Minion -
      On the one hand, it seems like Apple is protecting our privacy.

      But the moment you use iCloud to back up your iPhone, all your information is stored on Apple's servers unencrypted!!!
    1. bbrks's Avatar
      bbrks -
      And how do you know that?
    1. Zokunei's Avatar
      Zokunei -
      There is no such thing as a single case that won't set precedent in law.
    1. Bo's Avatar
      Bo -
      I praise Tim Cook and Apple for their choice to stand firm and protecting 'us'. Creating an open backdoor to our devices is what Snowden and many others have warned us about.

      I can see perhaps in this case allowing Apple to unlock this one device for National Security, but to give them Carte Blanche to all Apple devices, would be something I think we would all fight against.

      Absurd... this just can not happen.
    1. Zokunei's Avatar
      Zokunei -
      Quote Originally Posted by blkcadi View Post
      I can see perhaps in this case allowing Apple to unlock this one device for National Security, but to give them Carte Blanche to all Apple devices would be something I think we would all fight against.
      These are not two separate things, and that's the whole point of this letter.
    1. RandyTG's Avatar
      RandyTG -
      Quote Originally Posted by blkcadi View Post
      I can see perhaps in this case allowing Apple to unlock this one device for National Security.
      That is the problem; if they unlock the one phone the tool will exist and the FBI/NSA/(Any other Government Agency name here...) will have access to it.
    1. Bo's Avatar
      Bo -
      Quote Originally Posted by Zokunei View Post
      These are not two separate things, and that's the whole point of this letter.
      I get it, I was just stating my point of view.
    1. Bo's Avatar
      Bo -
      Quote Originally Posted by RandyTG View Post
      That is the problem; if they unlock the one phone the tool will exist and the FBI/NSA/(Any other Government Agency name here...) will have access to it.
      My thoughts are that perhaps allowing (only) Apple to to unlock this one device and not share the security, would be the best to serve both parties, Government and end users.
    1. cmwade77's Avatar
      cmwade77 -
      Quote Originally Posted by blkcadi View Post
      My thoughts are that perhaps allowing (only) Apple to to unlock this one device and not share the security, would be the best to serve both parties, Government and end users.
      The problem is once it has been done once, then it is known to be possible and can be duplicated by both government and criminals. So, no this should not happen and in fact Apple should take more steps to prevent it completely.
    1. Albut's Avatar
      Albut -
      Then they must give them the information to protect the public against terrorism and other serious threats. That's if they have a conscience.
    1. Purple Minion's Avatar
      Purple Minion -
      Quote Originally Posted by bbrks View Post
      And how do you know that?
      Research it for yourself. Apparently the security community is well aware of this problem, but it doesn't get much say in the normal press.
    1. Silvio6's Avatar
      Silvio6 -
      It looks like this is a good piece of PR for Apple.
      I can not believe they are NOT able to unencrypt one device and hand over the data to authorities, without showing how/what method was used.
    1. Zokunei's Avatar
      Zokunei -
      I for one cannot believe the FBI could have physical access to a device for months without being able to find a vulnerability. Seems to me they might be more concerned with getting a legal precedent and skeleton key.
    1. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
      SpiderManAPV -
      Quote Originally Posted by Zokunei View Post
      I for one cannot believe the FBI could have physical access to a device for months without being able to find a vulnerability. Seems to me they might be more concerned with getting a legal precedent and skeleton key.
      Of course! This isn’t about one or two important cases where they need access to the info on a terrorist’s phone; they want to be able to access anyone’s phone at any time without the time and effort of brute-forcing it.
    1. fleurya's Avatar
      fleurya -
      Quote Originally Posted by Purple Minion View Post
      Research it for yourself. Apparently the security community is well aware of this problem, but it doesn't get much say in the normal press.
      You have the choice of whether or not to use iCloud. You can keep everything on your phone and encrypted if you choose. That is very different from this case.
    1. fleurya's Avatar
      fleurya -
      Quote Originally Posted by Silvio6 View Post
      It looks like this is a good piece of PR for Apple.
      I can not believe they are NOT able to unencrypt one device and hand over the data to authorities, without showing how/what method was used.
      Problem is they don't only want it once. That's just their own PR work. If Apple opens one phone then the floodgate rip open and I'm sure they have or will have thousands of other cases for various things not even close to the importance of terrorism, and Apple would be forced to relent. That's when your security goes out the window.
    1. PeeceKeeper's Avatar
      PeeceKeeper -
      Quote Originally Posted by Albut View Post
      Then they must give them the information to protect the public against terrorism and other serious threats. That's if they have a conscience.
      "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 11 Nov. 1755 in Reply to the Governor

      Or to paraphrase: He who gives up liberty (in this case our freedom to privacy) for security, deserves neither liberty nor security.

      Just my $0.02
    1. xWalmartCandyx's Avatar
      xWalmartCandyx -
      Show us where it says that Apple has stated that they won't be implementing it.
    1. Silverado1987's Avatar
      Silverado1987 -
      Quote Originally Posted by xWalmartCandyx View Post
      Show us where it says that Apple has stated that they won't be implementing it.
      The title. It says the fbi wants to hack iPhones and Apple says no.
    1. Bo's Avatar
      Bo -
      Quote Originally Posted by xWalmartCandyx View Post
      Show us where it says that Apple has stated that they won't be implementing it.
      Why Are Apple and the FBI Battling Over an iPhone? - NBC News
  • Connect With Us

  • Twitter Box

  • Facebook