It's real simple. Two special agents appear at Apple's pre-designated lab with the Iphone in question with a court order and the owner's waiver, and stand their in the lab with video and audio recording the chain of custody events while the technician(s) hook up the phone to a computer containing the proprietary software and the software downloads and unscrambles the file or files in the phone that are desired by the FBI and hands the "English" to them on a disk or flash drive with an accompanying affidavit affirming/swearing to the validity and accuracy of the "translation," and the two agents depart with the Iphone, their copy of the information (the only one is ok .. keeping in mind ala HillariousNoMore than there is unscrambled data on the Apple computer (which can be scrubbed while the agents remain there to observe and confirm) ...., and the paper work confirming the chain of custody, extraction, translation, and authenticity of the "English."That is what should have been ordered by the court, and no one at Apple would oppose that. To my understanding, the feds are demanding they develop software that will allow the government to do it at will in the future. Well, at the will of a "secret judge" in a "secret court". I hope they refuse.
Now explain how ...
"...Criminals, terrorists, the Chinese, NSA, exwife's lawyer, ..." are going to get the "unscrambling software"? It NEVER leaves the Apple lab computer! Originally Posted by LexusLover
I think the FBI should give the phone to Apple, let them open it and give it back. The owner is dead, so no privacy should be expected...The algorithms for getting into the phone are still safe with Apple...and the FBI gets more info on the network of people that helped kill Americans. Originally Posted by gladius82This doesn't change the fact that the government is compelling apple to create software that undermines their encryption. The reality is that there is no guarantee that they can keep this underwraps: that type of technology is so valuable to so many people (criminals, foreign governments, etc) that the incentive to get it would be so high that it is likely that someone would find a way (ie simply paying someone off for it). This would make us all, who are smart enough to use the encryption, less safe. They argue that they are doing this for our own safety, but the reality is that it will almost certainly make us less safe.
A lot of people don't realize that you already have much less privacy than you think.....your banking records are NOT owned by you is one example. The IRS can garnish your wages by simply sending a letter to your employer, no court order is needed...In fact the NSA probably can unlock the phone and is doing this as a "disinformation" campaign so the terrorists will rush to use Apple I-phones.Just because we don't have privacy elsewhere does not justify further eroding it. I'm not arguing whether or not they can legally do this: what I am arguing is that doing so doesn't protect us, it hurts us.
This doesn't change the fact that the government is compelling apple to create software that undermines their encryption. The reality is that there is no guarantee that they can keep this underwraps: that type of technology is so valuable to so many people (criminals, foreign governments, etc) that the incentive to get it would be so high that it is likely that someone would find a way (ie simply paying someone off for it). This would make us all, who are smart enough to use the encryption, less safe. They argue that they are doing this for our own safety, but the reality is that it will almost certainly make us less safe.I think you are right on this point. Ironically, StormFront agrees with you, also.
Just because we don't have privacy elsewhere does not justify further eroding it. I'm not arguing whether or not they can legally do this: what I am arguing is that doing so doesn't protect us, it hurts us. Originally Posted by eatfibo
Not much, if any of "it"!You mean the Saudi attack on the US? And, no. I'm not willing to lose freedom for the sake of security. You can live in fear if you want. Don't drag me into your totalitarian hellhole.
Don't you wish someone would have had a cell phone to examine? Originally Posted by LexusLover
Don't you wish someone would have had a cell phone to examine? Originally Posted by LexusLover
Absolutely. Unless getting that cell phone required the state violated everyone's rights, or making us less safe by undercutting encryption. Originally Posted by eatfibo
I'm not willing to lose freedom for the sake of security. You can live in fear if you want. Don't drag me into your totalitarian hellhole. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyThe people buried within that rubble are not "free" and I didn't drag anyone into THAT "totalitarian hellhole"!