A court has ordered Apple to assist the FBI decrypt an iPhone of a dead terrorist. Apple says "No", as it could compromise the privacy of its customers and sets a precedence for the government demanding backdoor access in future devices.

 

http://www.popsci.com/apple-directed-by-...ers-phones

 

http://www.popsci.com/apple-denies-fbi-b...rs-devices

 

Who is in the right?

---

Apple.

---

I agree with Cook and I doubt it'll stop at that one phone so good for Apple. 

---

I think the government's going about it wrong.  They're asking for a masterkey that they could then use over and over on a similar device.  They should just ask Apple to unlock it, give the info to the government, and keep their masterkey in house.

 

But Apple has a damn good point in that there are other nations with less savory reputations than ours that would then want to force Apple to, in essence, give them a means on which to spy on their own people with Apple's blessing.  Imagine what the Saudis or Chinese would do with it.

 

Tricky situation, and I can see both sides of this one.

---

This is a very tricky situation.

 

On the one hand, getting the contents of the phone could lead to important information regarding national security.  Having Apple's assistance to do this would be a great help.  On the other hand, a tool such as this in the wrong hands could be disastrous.

 

In my opinion, this should have never been leaked/given to the press.  I think that Apple is doing the right thing by refusing because they don't need to be involved in this sort of thing.  They are in the technology business, not in the hacking business.  If something like this does take place, think what it will do for their business.

 

I can't really answer the question because in this case, I think that their help would have been very valuable when it comes to national security.  As I stated though, Apple needs to look out for the interests of current and/or future customers in order to stay in business.  A court order is beyond the reach of government and now that it is public knowledge it's pretty safe to say that Apple won't do it.

 

The bottom line is, an argument can be made either way regarding this.  The biggest mistake was letting it go public.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Alleged criminal John McAfee offers solution

---

Alleged criminal John McAfee offers solution

 

At this point, that's probably the best solution for the government.  I would caution though, you don't "mess" with these people... if you know what I mean.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I think this makes the Feds look hilariously incompetent

---

Who's in the wrong?


Those poor, poor people who purchase Apple phones... that's the real travesty.

---

80% of what I talk about is nonesense.. the other 25% is made up statistics...


 

Who's in the wrong?


Those poor, poor people who purchase Apple phones... that's the real travesty.

 

This. I dropped the iPhone after gen 1 and have not since purchased another Apple product. I did like their iPods in the early-mid-2000s though.

---

I think this makes the Feds look hilariously incompetent

 

Maybe it's a way of testing Apple... like:


'Hey, we (The FBI) absolutely, categorically, 100% know how to hack this guys phone... but just for a laugh.. why don't YOU (Apple) do it... and we'll tell you if you did it right....'

 

Sounds plausible..right?

---

80% of what I talk about is nonesense.. the other 25% is made up statistics...


 

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin

 

I do not pretend to be as smart as Ben Franklin, so I think his stance would be to defend Apple's right not to have to build a back door (at their cost no less) for whatever reason the FBI gave them...

 

Less Govt more Liberty...

---

Apple is in the right. 

---

No reason Apple can't do this in house and return the data the FBI is asking for.

 

If the result of the terrorist' actions involved injuring or killing a loved one would Apple still be in the right?

---

No reason Apple can't do this in house and return the data the FBI is asking for.

 

If the result of the terrorist' actions involved injuring or killing a loved one would Apple still be in the right?

 

Yes.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

now Bill Gates is siding with the FBI instead of Apple.

---

I had to go all the way to page 2 to dig up this thread. Trump seems to be attracting a lot of attention these days....

 

Anyway, I've been undecided on this issue until today.  Since the potential for abuse of power is just too great, I vote, NO.  

 

OBAMA: If government can't access phones, 'everybody is walking around with a Swiss Bank account in their pocket'

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-gove...22581.html

 

 

 

 


 

---

Kaishakunin for hire.

* (disclaimer) If you think I'm serious, hit yourself in the face w/ a hammer.

 

Obama is well known as a nanny-stater and strongly supported from within the White House the expansion of NSA mass data collection. I'd expect no less than a "trust us, it's for your own good" from him.

---

That didn't take long, It looks like the FBI may not need Apple's help after all.  Anyone want to re-cast their vote?

 

https://boingboing.net/2016/03/21/fbi-ma...-help.html

---

Kaishakunin for hire.

* (disclaimer) If you think I'm serious, hit yourself in the face w/ a hammer.

 

FBI realized password was 1234.

---