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

151–160 of 314 posts

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#151

Post by bobwaycott »

SanFranManDan wrote: post #115
ktRolster wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way (IMO) is to make it unbreakable, and off by default. Then the people who care about privacy can have it, and the justice department can be happy most of the time.

But I am sure a large portion of the people involved in activities where the government wants their info will have it turned on. I'm sure if Snowden's phone was encrypted they wouldn't go "Oh well ~90% of americans dont have encryption turned on so we'll just be happy with that."

Snowden is a poor example here. He worked in intelligence, a field the government would logically and rightly expect to value encryption. This, Snowden would fit in by using encryption here. He'd stand out if he didn't.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#152

Post by studentrob »

update wrote: post #25
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 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?

Orin Kerr, a computer crime law professor and writer, tried to guess over two posts [1] [2]. He did not give an answer but he has not finished writing his thoughts on the subject.

One thing he hasn't talked about yet is how the FBI would reimburse Apple.

The most recent relevant court case that used the AWA was US vs. New York Telephone. Part of the court decision states:

"The order provided that the Company be fully reimbursed at prevailing rates, and compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the Company and no disruption to its operations."

In his analysis, Orin simplifies and assumes that the FBI could pay for Apple's services. I wonder if they could. Apple is being asked to weaken its product, and despite the government claiming otherwise, I think Apple knows best about whether their product is being weakened or not.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#153

Post by leonatan »

Bud wrote: post #140
awesomepantsm wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Should the government be able to access citizen's digital data with a court order? I don't think that's a good question at all. Regardless of the ruling, they aren't going to up and declare encryption illegal. You can't throw a legal requirement at math to stop working.

This is dangerously naive. You think the government can't do something illogical? You just wait for it. You think the government can't outlaw the use of something, even if it's an ineffectual half-measure that does more harm than good? Were you alive during the "War on Drugs"?

Why "were"? We are still alive, humanity is still suffering from the "war on drugs".

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#154

Post by mc808 »

bmelton wrote: post #147
mc808 wrote: post #77

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?

> Alternatively, introduce a restriction that this form of forced labor can only be compelled in terrorism cases That would simply spur a lot more manufactured "high profile terrorism cases" hitting the news.

That or they will move on to the next narrative, cyber crime or human trafficking or any number of crimes that would be sooo much easier to solve if we gutted the Constitution a little bit more.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#155

Post by leonatan »

newman314 wrote: post #135
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…

What's alarming is that sites like The Verge are posting articles like this [1] essentially condoning the FBI's position. I would have expected them to know better. [1] http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/23/11100152/apple-fbi-terrori...

Conspiracy theory: The Verge is still angry that Apple enabled content blocking, thus allowing users to remove most of their adtech bloat.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#156

Post by nickysielicki »

edraferi wrote: post #73
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 comprom…

> "can the All Writs Act compel a company to proactively defeat its own security measures?"

I think there's a qualifier on there that you're missing. It's not just if the All Writs Act can compel a company to undermine their security measures. It's "if a company can undermine their security measures, can the All Writs Act compel them to do so?"

I think the answer is, arguably, "yes."

But that's a meaningful distinction because the 5C lacks trusted execution, and newer iPhones have it. I just read an article where Apple claims the precedent set in this case could force them to undermine phones with trusted execution. And that's probably true, too, IFF they can undermine it themselves.

But the All Writs Act certainly cannot bar a company from creating something that cannot be undermined.

So they'll make firmware that can't be modified without wiping the device.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#157

Post by orionblastar »

Bud wrote: post #140
awesomepantsm wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Should the government be able to access citizen's digital data with a court order? I don't think that's a good question at all. Regardless of the ruling, they aren't going to up and declare encryption illegal. You can't throw a legal requirement at math to stop working.

This is dangerously naive. You think the government can't do something illogical? You just wait for it. You think the government can't outlaw the use of something, even if it's an ineffectual half-measure that does more harm than good? Were you alive during the "War on Drugs"?

If you studied history they passed prohibition that banned alcohol. It did not work as bootleggers and gangsters would make their own alcohol and sell it at hidden clubs. Stores would sell fruit juice next to sugar and yeast and all the customer had to do was find a way to mix them to make alcohol.

They eventually had to repeal Prohibition.

When they banned drugs, they did the same thing. It is prohibition all over again. Criminals and gangs got into dealing drugs for money and people can't give them up. The war on drugs doesn't work because the CIA makes money from drug lords, and gangs and criminals make a lot of money selling drugs on the street. I managed to grow up without getting into drug but during the 1970s and 1980s there was a lot of peer pressure into doing drugs with others when I was growing up. It has become a social thing.

Many prisoners are in prison for using drugs. So our prison system is over crowded as a result. All the war on drugs did was imprison drug users and not go after the gangs and dealers.

The government doesn't get privacy rights. So they violate privacy in order to crack encryption on an iPhone via a backdoor or master key or modified iOS that gets rid of passcode penalties and brute forces the passcode. They only see getting the data off the iPhone to use as evidence, and don't care that it causes iPhone users to lose their privacy and make iPhones less secure.

The government isn't logical about these things, judges and politicians are for the most part not tech savvy enough to understand the technology and the need for privacy. They studied law, and other things, and not technology in the most case to understand how it works. They see getting evidence on terrorists as a priority and don't care what rights it violates. They can pass a law that pressed criminal charges at Apple employees and management for not helping out and try to force them to do what they say. We faced the same issues on the war on terror that required domestic spying and collection of metadata via the US Patriot Act.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#158

Post by imrehg »

m_mueller wrote: post #141
edraferi wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 comprom…

> "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? IMO yes and here is how I'd implement this given a secure enclave: 1) Have Apple generate a device specific key that unlocks the device without pass code. 2) The key gets encrypted with an Apple held master key and printed on the inside of th…

And if the Apple master key is ever revealed or stolen, everyone's phone can be decrypted. So yeah, this plan still compromises the general security of the device.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#159

Post by studentrob »

lips wrote: post #22

Question which I can't get out of my head: It would stand to reason that the ruling on this case would affect other commercial phone and/or OS manufacturers, but how would it reflect on some OSS projects, where the coders are not necessarily employees of the project?

It wouldn't have any impact, and that's the point.

To block all encryption apps, you'd need to censor the internet and check every digital device at the border. The government needs to understand that this is the implication of the direction in which it wishes to take us.

Bruce Schneier goes into more detail: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/07/back_doors_wo...

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#160

Post by m_mueller »

imrehg wrote: post #158
m_mueller wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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? IMO yes and here is how I'd implement this given a secure enclave: 1) Have Apple generate a device specific key that unlocks the device without pass code. 2) The key gets encrypted with an Apple held master key and printed on the inside of th…

And if the Apple master key is ever revealed or stolen, everyone's phone can be decrypted. So yeah, this plan still compromises the general security of the device.

As is the case with Apple's software certifier key. AFAIK this is what we currently have to assume since Apple doesn't specify how the update process for the secure enclave works. If this is the case it doesn't change anything, the certifier key is already like a master key.
Post reply on HN