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

Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 314 posts

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#71

Post by ubernostrum »

mikekchar wrote: post #55
update wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article seems to confirm that Law Enforcement is going to do its best to set a legal precedent. What do you think the odds are that the gov. wins?

I am not a lawyer (and not even an American), but from my perspective, I don't see how they can loose. They have a warrant. I used to work on telephone switches and we added code that would allow someone with a warrant to record conversations all the time. We even had a generic facility for it. The main difference, of course, is that adding an ability to allow someone to intrude on privacy for a service is different…

The legal question here is really whether the All Writs Act can be used to compel development of new products with specific features law enforcement desires, because that's what it boils down to: they want a custom iOS build with custom security-bypass features that can be loaded onto any phone they want to snoop into.

And when framed like that -- government ordering a private company, without negotiation or contract or even agreed-upon -in-advance compensation, to develop a product -- I don't think there's a chance in hell of it standing up. The question is whether the court that ends up hearing the final appeal will frame it like that.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#72

Post by awongh »

kareemm wrote: post #23

This sounds exactly right. From an article I posted earlier[1]: > In interviews with BuzzFeed News Wednesday, the former officers with the FBI and NSA acknowledged that U.S. intelligence agencies have technology that has been used in past intelligence-gathering operations to break into locked phones. The question, they added, was whether it was worthwhile for the FBI to deploy that technology, rather than setting a p…

This makes a lot of sense since the government could issue an order through FISA and afaik apple would be required to comply with it.

The fact that they can resist the order and in a such a public way feels a little bit theatrical, given what we know about how these things work.

I wonder how much of what's happening between apple and the fbi / rest of the government is the tip of the iceberg.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#73

Post by edraferi »

jrapdx3 wrote: post #65

The article describes the Justice Dept. doing exactly what has been so widely predicted on HN and elsewhere. Doesn't seem like good timing on the government's part to publicly announce the intention to seek numerous iPhone "unlockings". Rather it plays into Apple's argument about unleashing a torrent of court-ordered demands which will have adverse consequences for security. Legal minds should weigh in, but I'm think…

It makes total sense that the givernment would use it's forensic capabilities whenever the need arises. The question at hand is: "can the All Writs Act compel a company to proactively defeat its own security measures?" The answer will apply to all cases.

The more important question is "Should the government be able to access citizen's digital data with a court order? And if so, how can that be enabled without compromising the general security of the device?

I suspect we'll ultimately wind up with mainstream device manufacturers maintaining some kind of per-device master key that they turn over when ordered.

This will enable government to access data in the typical case. Including foreign governments. Sophisticated bad guys will continue to use zero knowledge software, which government will attack by other means. The per-device master keys will be compromised eventually, which will force enterprises to upgrade their fleeta but normals won't care.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#74

Post by nindalf »

zardeh wrote: post #68
FungalRaincloud wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they came first for the nouns, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a noun; And then they came for the personal pronouns, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a personal pronoun; And then they came for the gerunds, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a gerund; And then . . . they came for me . . .

but 'me' is a personal pronoun

and finally they came for the pedants...

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#75

Post by caf »

mikekchar wrote: post #55
update wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article seems to confirm that Law Enforcement is going to do its best to set a legal precedent. What do you think the odds are that the gov. wins?

I am not a lawyer (and not even an American), but from my perspective, I don't see how they can loose. They have a warrant. I used to work on telephone switches and we added code that would allow someone with a warrant to record conversations all the time. We even had a generic facility for it. The main difference, of course, is that adding an ability to allow someone to intrude on privacy for a service is different…

I don't think the question turns on unreasonable searches. Apple isn't being searched here.

Instead, the question is whether the All Writs Act grants sufficient power to compel a company, third-party to the action, to build a tool for breaking into its product. This is different to your telephone interception example, because that interception is authorised by a specific statute, not using a general writ issued under the All Writs Act.

The argument here is executive overreach - that they should be asking the legislature to pass a law specifically to require this kind of assistance, rather than using the All Writs Act.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#76

Post by [deleted] »

jrapdx3 wrote: post #65

The article describes the Justice Dept. doing exactly what has been so widely predicted on HN and elsewhere. Doesn't seem like good timing on the government's part to publicly announce the intention to seek numerous iPhone "unlockings". Rather it plays into Apple's argument about unleashing a torrent of court-ordered demands which will have adverse consequences for security. Legal minds should weigh in, but I'm think…

[deleted]

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#77

Post by mc808 »

Let's end drug prohibition first, and then discuss whether to hack the remaining phones, if any. This whole fiasco has nothing to do with terrorism.

Alternatively, introduce a restriction that this form of forced labor can only be compelled in terrorism cases where lives are in imminent danger. How many phones will be left to hack?

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#78

Post by swyman »

mikekchar wrote: post #55
update wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article seems to confirm that Law Enforcement is going to do its best to set a legal precedent. What do you think the odds are that the gov. wins?

I am not a lawyer (and not even an American), but from my perspective, I don't see how they can loose. They have a warrant. I used to work on telephone switches and we added code that would allow someone with a warrant to record conversations all the time. We even had a generic facility for it. The main difference, of course, is that adding an ability to allow someone to intrude on privacy for a service is different…

> Essentially you will have to argue that compelling a company to create an exploit to satisfy a warrant constitutes an unreasonable search if that exploit can also be used to perform illegal searches.

From the majority opinion in another All Writs case that made it to the Supreme Court[1]:

"[The lower court] was apparently concerned that sustaining the District Court's order would authorize courts to compel third parties to render assistance without limitation regardless of the burden involved and pose a severe threat to the autonomy of third parties who for whatever reason prefer not to render such assistance. Consequently the Court of Appeals concluded that courts should not embark upon such a course without specific legislative authorization. We agree that the power of federal courts to impose duties upon third parties is not without limits; unreasonable burdens may not be imposed."

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/434/159

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#79

Post by arca_vorago »

Here is my take on the recent apple vs justice saga:

Being the cynical fuck I am, a former action arm of the darkside, I have been telling friends and family for years that they should assume anything with a cellular modem in it is potentially comprimised by a nation state or above actor (yes, "above" nation state exists... Its called the deep state you fool).

I automatically assume that such publicity is actually closer to a honeypot to entice foolish mid level criminals into thinking iBrain devices are "secure", when I think they probably have miltiple backdoor avenues in place.

Of course, I'm just the hn resident conspiracy theorist, so it's probably just me being paranoid...

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#80

Post by caf »

ikeboy wrote: post #51
wongarsu wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if the FBI drops a confiscated laptop and the hard drive breaks, can they compel Seagate to recover data from the drive?

Seagate has no special ability to recover data as far as I know. The case isn't comparable.

The All Writs Act doesn't say any thing about having a special or unique ability.
Post reply on HN