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

Microsoft, Google, Facebook Back Apple in Blocked Phone Case

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 261 posts

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

#101

Post by dlp211 »

samstave wrote: post #100
mythz wrote: 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…

If the government wins this case, I will permanently destroy my personal cell phone and will never have one again. I will maintain a cell phone for work only.

That's a bit extreme. Just because there is a weakness in the implementation details of the iPhone PIN mechanism does not mean that all phones are weak. Apple already uses extremely strong encryption, and when coupled with a largish alphanumeric passcode, the phone would not fall to such easy attacks as the phone in question (4-6 digit PIN).

This case is not about weakening encryption in any way, something that I think is not well understood outside a technical audience.

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

#102

Post by jat850 »

karmacondon wrote: post #91

I have a question for the lawyers on HN. Why doesn't the judge in the case hold Apple in contempt of court until they modify the OS, in the same way they would hold a reporter in contempt until they revealed a source? In both cases, you have a third party who is being compelled to assist an investigation against their will. My only guess is that there is a precedent set for reporters, but not for computer programmers…

I think at best, the judge could hold corporate officers in contempt, not any individual computer programmer or developer. However, given Apple's stance, they would likely respond to the contempt order in a similar way they are now: accrue the fines, don't pay them, appeal as high as it takes to have this ruling overturned.

I'm not a lawyer, at all. But my guess would be that if Apple reached a point in court where the original ruling was overturned, the contempt penalties would be invalidated.

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

#103

Post by armandososa »

eva1984 wrote: post #68
mythz wrote: 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.

https://medium.com/@jamesallworth/the-u-s-has-gone-f-ing-mad...

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

#104

Post by ssalazar »

eva1984 wrote: post #68
mythz wrote: 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.

> I didn't see anything wrong with 'Should Apple be forced to give the Terrorist's phone data to the FBI'

Thats really not even remotely a legitimate question in this instance. If Apple "had" the data Im sure they would give it up readily (and probably have already in this and other instances). But they physically or digitally do not have the data to give.

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

#105

Post by imron »

eva1984 wrote: post #68
mythz wrote: 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.

> But in case of a true terrorist, the answer should not be not that hard.

In the cases of true terrorists, having access to phone records and even having the father of a terrorist report on his own son hasn't been enough to stop attacks.

So, you should be asking whether or not you should be giving up your right to privacy and awarding the government broad powers that, based on historical data, won't reliably help prevent terrorist attacks, but that will be used far outside the original scope for which they were granted.

You should also not just be asking about the current government, but all future governments, and be able to trust that they will only act in the best interest of their citizens.

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

#106

Post by duaneb »

EGreg wrote: post #97
bunderbunder wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

How so?

Perhaps the very tactics currently sustaining the reporting industry will lead to its downfall.

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

#107

Post by onion2k »

eva1984 wrote: post #68
mythz wrote: 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.

But the FBI's request isn't limited to only phones used by categorically proven terrorists. They want to be able to unlock and unencrypt phones that pass a much lower bar regarding evidence of criminal activity - arguably to the point where they have a backdoor to any phone they want to look inside of. That's why Apple has to fight this case. It isn't about terrorists, that's just the PR spin the FBI are using. It's about much more than that.

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

#108

Post by imron »

sah2ed wrote: post #96
dcw303 wrote: post #74

This just makes the Gates story even stranger. Did the FT misquote him because they're incompetent, or do they have an ulterior motive at play?

It was stated at the end of the Bloomberg article that Bill Gates' position on the issue was misreported: Earlier this week, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates told Bloomberg Television he was “disappointed” by reports that he supports the U.S. government in this dispute, saying it doesn’t accurately reflect his opinion. “That doesn’t state my view on this,” he said in an interview on “Bloomberg Go.” “The extreme view t…

Note that the article doesn't actually go on to clarify or accurately state what his opinion is.

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

#109

Post by icebraining »

karmacondon wrote: post #91

I have a question for the lawyers on HN. Why doesn't the judge in the case hold Apple in contempt of court until they modify the OS, in the same way they would hold a reporter in contempt until they revealed a source? In both cases, you have a third party who is being compelled to assist an investigation against their will. My only guess is that there is a precedent set for reporters, but not for computer programmers…

IANAL, that said, at the end of the order, it says

"To the extent that Apple believes that compliance with this Order would be unreasonably burdensome, it may make application to this Court for relief within five business days of receipt of the Order."

Since Apple has presented such an application, they are now supposed to return to court next month to argue their position.

Post reply on HN