Apple CEO Tim Cook Opposes Court Order to allow Govt. Acess to it's iOS devices

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Webster

I think they should compromise and in certain "rare" cases, apple should decrypt the data and turn it over if they have a warrant. something done "in house" and completely "secret" known only to apple keeps things as they should be and only provides access for national security reasons only such as getting phone records used to be.

I do NOT think they should create software to give to anyone to allow decrypting it, that would be stupid and wrong. way too many bad things can happen there.

Could well be the way forward but I doubt in this day and age that will happen.

Only time will tell.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

While this may seem like a simple case, the suspect is dead, and they are looking for loose ends and leads for conspirators, it's not a path we want to take.

If apple does this once, just once, then the precedent is set to keep doing it. This is a pandora's box scenario.

First off, the tech. They can't (supposedly) do it right now. They would have to engineer a solution to break their own security. That itself is a bad idea. Companies get hacked, all the time. If this security crack got loose, it would destroy their entire business model, or at least a good portion of it. Every other phone out there that would be accessible by this crack would be vulnerable to hacking.

Then there's the precedent of it. If they did it in this one case, then what's stopping the government from 'forcing' them to do it again? Nothing. And in fact, we all know it will happen.

I'll paraphrase Franklin here. Those would give up some freedom for a little security, deserve neither freedom nor security.

Well said. I saw a piece where high ranking members of the NSA visited with the heads of Google, Facebook, Apple and many others to request the same access to their records, servers and anything else they could think of. I will try to find the piece again.

As you and most of us have said, once a precedence is established, it will never end.

Some have said they don't like Tim Cook and that he may well be doing this to protect his company. Isn't this what a good CEO is supposed to do ? Whatever Tim's reasons might be, I applaud his efforts to protect his clients and customers.

No one wants terrorism or loss of life and I think most want to help law enforcement including these companies and the average citizen. I think the only solution is a valid court order for a specific individual of interest. This way, law enforcement has to show probable cause and it's specifics .

I thought Congress effectively legislated Nov 27 of 2015 that the NSA wasn't to be able to collect bulk records. One thing is clear, this is a highly contentious issue that won't easily be resolved short of having the case heard by the Supreme Court.

[Oberon]

http://arstechnica.co.uk/staff/2016/...oe-on-live-tv/

[August]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Here's my question. Why is a scheme never attempted where law enforcement is permitted to do these things, but it will cost them automatically even in the best case? Why must Legality always mean complete immunity?

Immunity? Why should an employee, any employee, have to pay a fee to perform the work he was ordered to perform by his employer? I bet if that were the case in your job you wouldn't be working there very long. I certainly wouldn't unless they hiked my salary up enough that your fee would be negligible by comparison.

Would not actually having to personally pay for the privilege help restrict it to cases of real necessity?

You think it's such a privilege to work as a Law Enforcement Officer that they should have to pay instead of being paid? Sounds to me like you'd just rather have law enforcement not do any investigating ever because that would be the result of such a ridiculous scheme. Of course then you'd be first in line to complain that they didn't prevent the next San Bernadino or 9-11 right?

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Webster

I think they should compromise and in certain "rare" cases, apple should decrypt the data and turn it over if they have a warrant. something done "in house" and completely "secret" known only to apple keeps things as they should be and only provides access for national security reasons only such as getting phone records used to be.

I do NOT think they should create software to give to anyone to allow decrypting it, that would be stupid and wrong. way too many bad things can happen there.

And I'm utterly dismayed that Apple did not offer exactly that solution. Then no tool would escape the process and the legitimate need to know the contents of a dead murderer's cell phone would be satisfied.

Apple would merely extract the data and send the data only to the Federal government.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

I suggest you read up on the subject a bit more .

Thomas Jefferson (April 13 [O.S. April 2] 1743 – July 4, 1826) was an American Founding Father who was principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776).

During the American Revolution, he represented Virginia in the Continental Congress that adopted the Declaration, drafted the law for religious freedom as a Virginia legislator, and served as a wartime governor (1779–1781).
Jefferson served as a delegate to the Second Continental Congress beginning in 1775 at the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War. He sought out John Adams who, along with the latter's cousin Samuel, had emerged as a leader of the Congress. Jefferson and Adams established a permanent friendship which led to Jefferson's work on the Declaration of Independence. Adams supported Jefferson's appointment to the Committee of Five formed to write the Declaration in furtherance of the Lee Resolution passed by the Congress.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

Apparently ,Wikipedia disagrees with you. Perhaps you should send them a note and site your expertise. If you notice, I had said " one of the framers " of the Constitution. Wikipedia agrees with that .

Your time might be better spent reading up on the material instead of trying to make others look foolish.

The article I wrote was to inform others of what issues are taking shape in Federal Court and how far reaching the implications of these questions are and the ramifications and consequences of any decisions.

The article was further written to invite discussion and debate among our more learned and intelligent Subsim members.

Apparently you should actually read what Wikipedia has to say. Where does it say that Jeffereson was one of the framers of the US Constitution? It does not. And he was not.

Steve is exactly right and your "evidence" bears that out. Your time might better be spent......etc.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Apparently you should actually read what Wikipedia has to say. Where does it say that Jeffereson was one of the framers of the US Constitution? It does not. And he was not.

Steve is exactly right and your "evidence" bears that out. Your time might better be spent......etc.

In fact, I was referring to the fact Ben Franklin was a signer and framer of
the Constitution and also the Declaration of Independence although I made no reference to the Declaration.With regards to Thomas Jefferson, I listed what Wilkepedia had said as far as his being one of the founding fathers of the U.S along with Ben Franklin and other notables.

I should have made the distinction but I had no idea there was going to be a test today. I just assumed most would intelligently infer what I meant and make the distinction for themselves and have better things to do than hang me out to dry. Most here were classy enough to do just that and focus on the body of work I wrote and have an intelligent and rational discussion.


Enough said. Lets move on.

[Eichhörnchen]

This is all very well, but none of it explains exactly why they gave the part of the chimney sweep to Dick Van Dyke.

[vienna]

Casting couch?...



<O>

[Rockstar]

Rather than the word getting out Apple just complied with a government request. A show is put on for the public to keep up the appearence of a company concerned about their customers privacy

[August]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

I had no idea there was going to be a test today.

Think of it this way, you're turning in a test paper every time you hit the Submit Reply button.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by August

Think of it this way, you're turning in a test paper every time you hit the Submit Reply button.

Guilty as charged.

( goes to time out box to stand in corner )

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Eichhörnchen

This is all very well, but none of it explains exactly why they gave the part of the chimney sweep to Dick Van Dyke.

LOL. Chimney sweep.

* Tries to be inconspicuous in sliding Eichhörnchen's cheese back on his cracker *

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

And I'm utterly dismayed that Apple did not offer exactly that solution. Then no tool would escape the process and the legitimate need to know the contents of a dead murderer's cell phone would be satisfied.

Apple would merely extract the data and send the data only to the Federal government.

It is important to remember that the FBI is in the business of collecting evidence and prosecuting cases in court. There has to be a chain of evidence custody. There are extensive rules of evidence that must be adhered to in order for data to be entered in to the court as evidence.

Imagine what a good defense attorney could do with:

"My client's cell phone was given to a corporation which is not a sworn law enforcement official agency; does not operate under the rules of evidence; is not certified by any legal authority, and the cell phone was exposed to unknown tampering outside of any supervision and "magically" incriminating evidence resulted. In addition this this we can't know what and how this tampering was done to my client's cell phone? We are supposed to trust that some tech at Apple did not add or subtract or in any way manipulate the data, just because they said so? Is that what your "evidence" is against my client?"


Your Honor, I respectfully suggest that the members of the jury be instructed to duck so they don't get hit when this case is thrown out of your court.

[Mittelwaechter]

Platapus - I like the way you're thinking.

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Rather than the word getting out Apple just complied with a government request. A show is put on for the public to keep up the appearence of a company concerned about their customers privacy

Kudos!

https://twitter.com/snowden/status/700823383961792512