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

251–260 of 314 posts

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#251

Post by FrankyHollywood »

studentrob wrote: post #226
FrankyHollywood wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so if a phone can be cracked in 1 hour it is allowed, but if it takes a month the government can't? this discussion is not about complexity!

Apple isn't an arm of military intelligence. They shouldn't be compelled to act as one, particularly when the task would take a month, yes. It's not just about time. Part of Apple's product is security. The DOJ is asking them to weaken their product. This could cost Apple their business in the long run as foreign companies enter the fray and offer a secure product that Apple is no longer allowed to produce. Keep in m…

We live a western society, not China. If more than 50% of the population wants the phone to be cracked it should be done. That's what we all agreed on living in a democracy. Law is formed by the wishes of majority.

I'm not a lawyer. Is the FBI asking something from Apple which is not legal? Than go to court.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#252

Post by FrankyHollywood »

Piskvorrr wrote: post #193
FrankyHollywood wrote: post #185

The discussion about encryption is getting completely out of context, like 'encryption' is something magical. We're talking about cracking a 4 digit access code of a phone, which is extremely easy. Apple knows this, that's why they set a digital booby trap which fires after 10 tries. So the real discussion should be, "Can the government force a company who placed a booby trap, to remove that same trap if needed?" Whe…

What is encryption? It's a method of denying access without the correct key (for as long as it takes for the data to become worthless - not necessarily forever). Actually destroying the data is one of the ways to deny access. NB: if it were so easy, we wouldn't be having this discussion. So, apparently there are some mitigation techniques which help in case of weak passphrases, and make it not-so-easy, no?

Yes, but for Apple it is easy. Just change 1 line of code, recompile and patch the phones firmware. Than some FBI intern can try 10000 lockscreen codes and they're in. No big deal.

My whole point is, this is not a technical issue. It is easy. It is a legal issue. Can the government force a company to do such a thing? Especially when the impact on society is zero. The firmware upgrade is not released outside of Apple, no other phones get it.

It feels almost like a publicity stunt to me. Apple being the underdog in the fight against the big evil government.

If they don't want to cooperate and there is no legal basis for doing so, than don't cooperate.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#253

Post by merpnderp »

Laaw wrote: post #43
merpnderp wrote: post #17

Apple does have a point. I probably won't own a device with a known vulnerability even if it was at the behest of the government.

Do you own a home? Do you own a car? The executive branch can obtain warrants from the judicial branch to "exploit vulnerabilities" and gain access to these "devices".

Right, and they're in full ownership of that phone. They can do whatever they want with it. The issue here is they want to force Apple to create something brand new against their will. The analogy is a lot like those TSA approved luggage locks that have master keys floating around so that the locks really only keep out law abiding people, as anyone who wants one can get it off E-Bay.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#254

Post by andrepd »

p01926 wrote: post #172
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? No. And that's both impossible and a massive compromise. This case helps us tackle that first question. Here the murderer's personal phone and computer hard drives were destroyed — rendering them "above/beyond the law". Just because some data…

Why not? Police can search your house or seize your mail with a court order. Why can't they search your phone or computer?

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#255

Post by vox_mollis »

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…

the only effective remedy is going to be congressional action

We are well, well beyond that point. This will never happen, given the authoritarian and fearful bent of the electorate and the elected.

The 3% solution is the only truly effective remedy.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#256

Post by studentrob »

exodust wrote: post #242
studentrob wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question at hand is whether or not the DOJ can use the AWA to compel a company to weaken its product. It's unclear as yet whether the court will consider this too burdensome for Apple, or too expensive for the FBI to be able to reimburse Apple for any costs. Apple's argument is that this will set a precedent, and the FBI will ask to unlock many phones in the future, possibly even to the point of preventing Apple…

I'm aware of all that, your summary wasn't needed, and is lacking your personal opinion! "I think" is not a bad thing to say once in a while. I'll take a guess that your position is identical to Apple's recent letter on the matter. I think Apple should help unlock these phones, with the condition that such help may be impossible in future versions of the OS. Who wouldn't want future versions of iOS to prevent these r…

> I'm aware of all that

Was your original question rhetorical? In case it wasn't clear by my summary, no, we should not be satisfied with a longer passphrase. We should be concerned about the precedent-setting nature of this case.

> your summary wasn't needed

This is an open discussion. Nobody's forcing you to read my summary.

> "I think" is not a bad thing to say once in a while.

I think that is implied by the fact that I wrote all that. Anything that I haven't cited is my personal take on the issues.

> I think Apple should help unlock these phones, with the condition that such help may be impossible in future versions of the OS

Nobody believes the FBI will adhere to this condition. They can always change their minds down the road.

> It's a bit like chess

It is like chess, you're right. The move has been made and the hand removed from the piece. Time to act, carpe diem. The best thing to do now is educate people about encryption and potentially make this an election issue at some point in the future. Right now the public has nothing to do with this case. It's going to be decided in a court among experts, lawyers and judges.

> Apple should comply now, and make a better chess move later

That's fine, it's your opinion. I disagree, and would add that now is the right time to take a stand while this is in the public spotlight. It will take time to educate the public about encryption and we might as well start now. Compelling Apple to circumvent its own security will make us less safe. There is a black market where exploits are bought by intelligence communities, and if Apple creates this exploit, there's a chance it will fall into the wrong hands.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#257

Post by dahart »

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…

> Doesn't seem like good timing on the government's part to publicly announce the intention to seek numerous iPhone "unlockings"

That was my immediate gut reaction, that it looks bad because Apple objections are proving true.

But now I wonder if the timing maybe works to their advantage, and the admission they want to use phone cracking everywhere is perhaps a very smart strategy. To technologists and privacy advocates, this might look like an admission of guilt. To the public at large, and the entire country, this might actually be a mountain of evidence that phone cracking is absolutely necessary, something we can't do without if otherwise phones are going to become unreadable by the "good guys".

For better or worse (and IMO it's worse) this might be a very strong argument with very good timing.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#258

Post by persusta »

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…

> This news prompts me to write my representative and senators and strongly urge them to support enacting this form of protective legislation.

Have they ever seemed to give a fuck about letters from any little peasant?

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#259

Post by gravypod »

bmelton wrote: post #146
gravypod wrote: post #132

I'm confused. From what I understand apple has been doing this for some time. I even remember someone saying that apple did this many times before. Even if apple isn't the one doing this, there are also plenty of people who are familiar with low level vulnerabilities of iPhones that can essentially do the same tasks.

Apple has not done "this" before. Apple may have unlocked phones for older models (with less security), but with the upgrades to iOS for versions 5 and 6, this is a much different ask. The FBI is hoping to have Apple develop a new iOS that does not automatically wipe the device after invalid password attempts, then use their signing keys to push a deployment of that operating system onto this specific phone. Nobody e…

Yes but they have unlocked phones before and they will conceivably continue to do it. It's not about the difficulty of the task, it is about the principle.

I haven't heard of the FBI asking to get apple's keys before, but that is crazy.

Re: Justice Department Wants Apple to Unlock Nine More iPhones

#260

Post by mcphage »

emergentcypher wrote: post #238
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…

Howabout the question is, should Congress repeal the All Writs Act.

Probably not. But they (or the courts) should make it clear what actions it can be used to compel, and what actions it can't be used to compel.
Post reply on HN