Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#71

Post by MCRed »

simoncion wrote: post #69
[deleted] wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

You're way off base on a bunch of your points, but here's one I'll address: > The "All Writs Act" doesn't apply here because... The All Writs Act appears to be somewhat frequently used to compel assistance with things like bypassing phone lock screens. It's not at all clear to this amateur law nerd -and appears to be not entirely clear in the professional law wonk community- that the attempt to use the AWA to compel…

I wasn't angry. I find the need to smear me like that an excellent example of the anti-intellectualism that is rife on this site.

Fine, I've deleted my contribution. I don't waste time attempting to explain science to christians, I shouldn't waste time trying to teach you lot logic. For the same reason.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#72

Post by fweespeech »

studentrob wrote: post #56
fweespeech wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scary part is that doesn't appear to be enough anymore. People are fundamentally irrational and are willing to believe the media narrative without attempting to think about the consequences critically.

It's too soon to get a feel for the media narrative, but, what do you think that will be? Doesn't Apple buy ads? Our media isn't always pro-government, thankfully, so let's see what comes out. So far I see reports of Cook's statement, the Apple Q&A, and Comey's letter. Some are opinionated but most are just telling the story.

> It's too soon to get a feel for the media narrative, but, what do you think that will be? Doesn't Apple buy ads?

Apple buys Ads but Apple "cares" only because of the PR value of encrypting things and the fact enough of Apple's younger crowd would ditch them that it would eat into their quarterly profits. However, if its in the corner of losing 5% of their customers vs. a major legal war with the US Government, I'm not sure they'll choose to fight much [if at all].

Apple buys Ads, yes, but so do 29103423904092334902 other companies. If Apple stops, they can get their money elsewhere. I've already heard tons of people insisting Apple shouldn't be allowed to encrypt phones, so I'd say the media narrative is already playing out to Apple's detriment.

> Our media isn't always pro-government, thankfully, so let's see what comes out. So far I see reports of Cook's statement, the Apple Q&A, and Comey's letter. Some are opinionated but most are just telling the story.

The vast majority of people IRL think I'm paranoid for believing:

1) Our law enforcement agencies are engaging in unreasonable levels of domestic mass surveillance.

http://abc7.com/news/anaheim-police-eavesdropping-on-persona...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anaheim-cops-spy-program...

http://www.allgov.com/usa/ca/news/top-stories/lapd-has-had-s...

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2930731/security0/surve...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/06/12/heres...

2) Terrorists are less dangerous than medical errors and other problems. The emphasis on their existence and the threat they pose appears to be intentionally propagandized to enable #1.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-g...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/2...

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/deaths-by-medical-mista...

3) I believe a large part of why people believe I'm paranoid is they largely operate in a soundbite environment when it comes to the news [largely by watching news from news networks, etc] rather than bothering to read it. The surveillance related issues seem to be largely only reported in written form and have relatively low circulation outside of media coverage of Snowden. People have already mostly forgotten / stopped caring.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#73

Post by twoodfin »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #51
twoodfin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually wondering this, too. Is there a technological reason why Apple fulfilling this request makes their (not subject-to-warrant) customers less secure? Why isn't their private code-signing key the linchpin? I fully buy that there are legal, cultural, and diplomatic reasons that this could make Apple's customers less secure in the long run by setting a precedent, etc. I guess one argument is that whatever code…

It won't have 'bugs'. It'll be written to allow FBI access at will. That's the next step, right?

Access to a single device. Access to other device would (if the "weaponized" iOS is written correctly in this regard) be impossible without Apple's private key to authenticate a modified version of the software.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#74

Post by harryh »

PopsiclePete wrote: post #25
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People aren't going to reflexively favor technological progress for its own sake when they see it undermining things they care about (jobs, security, etc). Correct me if I'm wrong it sounds like you are saying encryption is undermining security? It might be you have that backwards?

Like he said, it's all about the narrative. Let me demonstrate. Pretend you're an average voter who has never heard of "Hacker" News. "Encryption is used by terrorists and evil-doers to hide their nefarious plans to harm Americans and American values. Innocent and hard-working Americans have nothing to hide. Only those who wish to harm us do. Had Apple allowed the FBI to listen on emails and conversations and text me…

Wire taps and other methods of law enforcement snooping on otherwise private conversations are routinely used to convict people of crimes. In a world of pervasive encryption this will no longer be possible.

You're perfectly welcome to argue that pervasive encryption is coming whether the government wants it or not, so it might as well get used to it.

You're also perfectly welcome that the benefits of pervasive encryption outweigh the costs.

I might even agree with you on both points.

But to deny the costs is to deny reality.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#75

Post by JoeAltmaier »

twoodfin wrote: post #73
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't have 'bugs'. It'll be written to allow FBI access at will. That's the next step, right?

Access to a single device. Access to other device would (if the "weaponized" iOS is written correctly in this regard) be impossible without Apple's private key to authenticate a modified version of the software.

Which is one subpoena away.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#76

Post by twoodfin »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #75
twoodfin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Access to a single device. Access to other device would (if the "weaponized" iOS is written correctly in this regard) be impossible without Apple's private key to authenticate a modified version of the software.

Which is one subpoena away.

Well, that's the ballgame no matter what Apple does right now.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#77

Post by Shivetya »

rayiner wrote: post #19

It's hard being on the wrong side of prevailing sentiments, and when all this pans out I think people will be a little shocked at how the tech sector's enormous financial advantages will have carried less weight than anyone expected. You can't win politics with money alone. You need a narrative that appeals to peoples' values. Privacy is not a winner in this regard, nor is unrestricted markets (note the leading repub…

Interesting you say this, need a narrative. Oddly one person I have heard making an issue of this is Rush. He is so solidly on the side of Apple it is amazing. I am curious if this will translate into the primaries if not general election.

I would love to get the transcript to today's show, it has been very enlightening to hear it and one thing to note, probably ten to twenty million people will have heard it too

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#78

Post by tptacek »

twoodfin wrote: post #50
rayiner wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think even the token IT guy is wondering how the FBI's request to break specific iPhones in their possession is going to undermine iPhone security for everybody.

I'm actually wondering this, too. Is there a technological reason why Apple fulfilling this request makes their (not subject-to-warrant) customers less secure? Why isn't their private code-signing key the linchpin? I fully buy that there are legal, cultural, and diplomatic reasons that this could make Apple's customers less secure in the long run by setting a precedent, etc. I guess one argument is that whatever code…

It won't make phones less secure in any technological sense. Defeating the 5C's passcode counter is a capability Apple has today, and DOJ is willing to allow Apple to bypass it on Apple's own premises rather than providing DOJ with an image that does it.

The kind of insecurity people are talking about is a policy concern; people will feel less secure if Apple can be compelled to exploit their capability this way.

That's a valid concern, but it's not a concern that really touches on how much more the "token IT person" knows than a layperson with little technical knowledge.

It annoys me a lot when people in technology deploy special- pleading logic like this.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#79

Post by harryh »

tptacek wrote: post #78
twoodfin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually wondering this, too. Is there a technological reason why Apple fulfilling this request makes their (not subject-to-warrant) customers less secure? Why isn't their private code-signing key the linchpin? I fully buy that there are legal, cultural, and diplomatic reasons that this could make Apple's customers less secure in the long run by setting a precedent, etc. I guess one argument is that whatever code…

It won't make phones less secure in any technological sense. Defeating the 5C's passcode counter is a capability Apple has today, and DOJ is willing to allow Apple to bypass it on Apple's own premises rather than providing DOJ with an image that does it. The kind of insecurity people are talking about is a policy concern; people will feel less secure if Apple can be compelled to exploit their capability this way. Tha…

I think it has to do with a kind of black and white thinking that is common with people in technology. 2+2=4. 2+2!=5. Your code either compiles or it doesn't. A function is either correct or incorrect.

It is either acceptable for Apple to bypass a security feature or it is unacceptable. Tech people seem to have a real hard time with the idea that:

A) It might be acceptable some of time time but not others

B) There are competing values at play here and even if we decide it's (un)acceptable there are some downsides to either choice.

Re: Apple’s FBI battle is just the beginning of a reality check for the tech sector

#80

Post by mattmanser »

toyg wrote: post #55
mattmanser wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's odd, yesterday they had a fairly prominently displayed piece praising it (at least for the UK): http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/21/apple-s... If you look through the other articles it's all been fairly pro-Apple: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/apple It's a bit strange that a business writer has been allowed to fairly anonymously attack Apple, in what has been a pro-Snowdon/privacy paper.

pro-Snowden... but openly anti-Assange, and moving to the right of the political discourse at increasing speed (they dropped UK Labour in 2010, campaigned against the current Labour leader, and are keen to appease the US market).

Well, technically they are moving to the right, but to left of centre from the far left. They used to be insufferable, I actually far prefered the independant in print.

They used to have this tiresome war reporter who would write these highly biased and inflammatory pieces which weren't news but propaganda. And the opinion pieces, ugh. I used to rotate papers (telegraph, indie and Guardian), I personally thought the Guardian was terrible at unbiasedly reporting the actual news.

As the Guardian has become the main left wing news due to the independant sucking on the web, I'm glad they've chilled out a bit.

Post reply on HN