Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FBI asks Apple to hack iPhones from San Bernadino attacks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    By the way, since it hasn't been posted, here is Cook's full letter:



    February 16, 2016 A Message to Our Customers
    The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.

    This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.

    The Need for Encryption
    Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.

    All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.

    Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.

    For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers’ personal data because we believe it’s the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.

    The San Bernardino Case
    We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government’s efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.

    When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.

    We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.

    Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.

    The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.

    The Threat to Data Security
    Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.

    In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.

    The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.

    The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.

    We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.

    A Dangerous Precedent
    Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.

    The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.

    The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.

    Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.

    We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.

    While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.

    Tim Cook

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Murph Tang View Post
      Everything I've read it says the FBI is asking Apple to unlock the phone. How Apple goes about it seems to be the interpretation that Apple is fighting over.
      Not true:
      Rather than impel Apple to unlock the phone, the FBI wants Apple to help it develop a way to “bruteforce” the password—guess until it finds a match—without triggering a mechanism that deletes the key that decrypts the data. Currently, 10 wrong password tries will make the iPhone’s data inaccessible forever. The FBI would like to lift that restriction, along with the mandatory delays between password attempts that will slow their progress considerably.

      While this isn’t a “backdoor” in the traditional sense, Cook argues that it amounts to one.

      “The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation,” says Cook. “In the wrong hands, this software—which does not exist today—would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession. The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor.”
      Originally posted by Murph Tang
      It seems reasonable that a technological giant that Apple is could provide this information without compromising their security.
      Like abecx said, the biggest step toward creating a backdoor is knowing that there's a way to get in. If Apple does this, then even if they destroy the code that they used (and why would they do that? what if they need it in the future, because terrorism?), somebody could recreate it.
      Originally posted by Murph Tang
      I am entertained that Donald Trump and Obama are in agreement with this.
      It shouldn't be that surprising. Trump is a big government guy.
      Originally posted by Broncojohnny
      HOORAY ME and FUCK YOU!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Chili View Post
        Just think about the kids!!



        Everything? You sure? You did read the article in the first post, right?
        Yes and the judge ordered that only this phone be programmed with an identifier for the brute force program only this particular phone.
        Murph

        Lots of cars that nobody desires

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Nash B. View Post
          Not true:Like abecx said, the biggest step toward creating a backdoor is knowing that there's a way to get in. If Apple does this, then even if they destroy the code that they used (and why would they do that? what if they need it in the future, because terrorism?), somebody could recreate it.It shouldn't be that surprising. Trump is a big government guy.
          Who would be that somebody to recreate it if destroyed? An Apple employee if only done in house?

          Again its the interpretation on how the information is obtained that is key. Law Enforcement
          Murph

          Lots of cars that nobody desires

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Murph Tang View Post
            Who would be that somebody to recreate it if destroyed? An Apple employee if only done in house?
            A determined hacker, with no knowledge of how it worked; only knowledge that it existed.
            Originally posted by Broncojohnny
            HOORAY ME and FUCK YOU!

            Comment


            • #51
              holy shit tim cook is saying what I just said. A++

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Murph Tang View Post
                Who would be that somebody to recreate it if destroyed? An Apple employee if only done in house?
                You need to understand how computers work to understand that question has no relevance. Even a basic understanding of encryption would help.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by abecx View Post
                  You need to understand how computers work to understand that question has no relevance. Even a basic understanding of encryption would help.
                  What you are telling me is that Apple has no way of unlocking this phone without jeopardizing its entire security system?
                  Murph

                  Lots of cars that nobody desires

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Murph Tang View Post
                    What you are telling me is that Apple has no way of unlocking this phone without jeopardizing its entire security system?
                    Yes, but specially anything labelled as secure, not just Apple. I'd be more than happy to explain in person as to why.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      January 1 1970

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I understand the need for privacy. But we are talking about a phone that belonged to a terrorist. I might get flamed for This but I don't see an issue with the government hacking a terrorists phone, it would've been one thing if it were just accusations but these fuckers went on a shooting spree.

                        Again I am against government invading your privacy if it's just their word. The minute you choose mass murder. I don't care about the bad guys privacy.
                        sigpic🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄

                        Without my gun hobby. I would cut off my own dick and let the rats eat it...
                        🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Im betting uncle sam isn't going to allow Mr. Cook to say no. There will be consequences for refusing to obey a court order. That Judge could find him in contempt and jail him today...We'll see how this plays out

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            What if they had a Samsung instead?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              So the govt is going to all the sudden have tons of info with the unlocking the phone? Give me a break. If they don't know it already, the phone won't tell them anymore.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Give the govt an inch to unlock one phone and tomorrow they will want to unlock all phones on basis of "national security". Tim Cook is doing right.....I think if Steve jobs was still all he would tell govt to go fuck themselves.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X