Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

bloomberg.com

81–90 of 261 posts

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#81
post #68
post #22

From recent polls most people think this debate is about: "Should Apple be forced to give the Terrorist's phone data to the FBI" When what it's really about: "Should the FBI be able to compel technology companies to use their resources against their own and their Customers right to Security." In order for the public to be properly informed about what's really at stake this case needs to be about the "Technology Indus…

I didn't see anything wrong with 'Should Apple be forced to give the Terrorist's phone data to the FBI' It is what it is. You guys focuses more on how to limit FBI to abuse the terrorist card to violate privacy. But in case of a true terrorist, the answer should not be not that hard.

This is exactly what the FBI want's you to think and why they've carefully handpicked this case to try and set this legal precedent on - ridding us of our fundamental rights to privacy and security.

Out of all the 13 pending cases the FBI have with Apple using the All Writs Act (they've also said they have another 175 iPhones to unlock), this has the least chance of holding anything meaningful given it's his consent-to-monitor work phone, not his personal phone (which he destroyed), wasn't used at the scene of the crime, of which the FBI already have 6 week old iCloud backups of and would've had all the phones iCloud backups if they hadn't disabled them by instructing for the phones password to be reset.

Yet of all the pending cases under seal this is the one they've chosen to break character and go public on, exploiting this tragic event and using the fear around terror and emotions of victims for maximum PR and political effect to further their agenda of violating the security of millions of customers - which is both deceitful and clever, as apparently it's working.

I've always watched in bewilderment at the US Govt's response to terror, they're prepared to spend trillions fighting wars, billions changing Airport security, aren't prepared to do anything to change the easy access to the semi-automatic weapons that were actually used to kill all the victims, but are prepared to compromise the security and privacy of millions of peoples lives, violating 1st and 5th amendment constitutional rights for the theater of accessing useless data on a dead terrorist's work phone - for something which US citizens have less chance to die from than their own furniture? ...and the US public majority approves.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#82
post #78

Much to the FBI's chagrin, the Whitehouse agrees with Apple, which is a great sign that someone in this country is sane: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/us/politics/obama-wont-see...

I don't think that's accurate to say. The White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in his briefing a day or two ago that the administration backs Comey's efforts. US attorney general Loretta Lynch said she backs Comey too. Obama is the only one who hasn't made a public statement about this issue.

Chain of command, by the way, is Obama > Lynch > Comey. They're certainly in communication and agreement about this issue.

You might think Obama would feel differently given his rebuke of China last year for attempting to set the same kind of precedent. But no, he fails to see the similarity. It's scary. The highest ranking official who understands this issue is Ted Lieu.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#84

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

What about a dead-mans switch app on any phone where if you dont type in the code within a time definable to you - the phone shall be wiped?

Destruction of evidence, a felony!

Except the person in question is already dead, so there isn't much punishment the government can mete out here.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#85

One thing that I can't help thinking about in all of this... would Apple have contested this case had the Snowden leaks never occurred?

No quote from Apple itself, of course, but:

Former CIA Agent Says Edward Snowden Revelations Emboldened Apple to Push Back Against FBI: http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/25/former_cia_agent_says_...

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#86

Notice how the headline makes sure to specify "over terrorist's phone" and not "over user privacy" or "against federal conscription by the FBI." Take a second and re-read the headline. What does it say? To me, it spells out Microsoft joins Apple to back terrorist's privacy against the FBI. The government couldn't have chosen a better case to publicize in search of a precedent in their favor. And the media isn't helpi…

A few reporters, and law folks, might need to re-read To Kill A Mockingbird and think on what they're doing.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#87
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just "phone"? Terrorism shouldn't have anything to do with the case. I don't believe the fourth amendment makes a special provision for terrorists or other "scary" people. For a good reason—terrorism is a polemic term.

Like he said, for the clicks. It makes it seem like a more important case. It's also more descriptive for people who may be hearing about the story for the first time. Personally, I call it the San Bernardino iPhone case.

"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." - Lenin

Can't say I agree with him on much, but he had a point with that quote.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#89

One thing that I can't help thinking about in all of this... would Apple have contested this case had the Snowden leaks never occurred?

Yes. But it wouldn't have been in the public sphere. It would have happened behind closed doors like what happened to Yahoo in 2008 (which we didn't find out about until 2014). And in the secret court, my guess is Apple loses. Law enforcement would get what it wants because privacy advocates only seem to exist in the public.

Although many are saying this will be decided in court, the public opinion matters a lot here. We sway action in government through our votes. Thankfully this time we have a say in the matter.

Re: Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

#90

How far could the FBI use this case as a precedent if it goes through? Could they demand to get stuff signed and put on Canonicals repos? Could they demand to get a MS-signed EFI? Or could this case just be used as a precedent in cases that clearly only involved one (1) specific device?

Nobody knows. That would be for the unelected judge to decide, which is what makes this all so scary.
Post reply on HN