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

Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 376 posts

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#71

Post by harryh »

vidanay wrote: post #68
harryh wrote: post #56

Son, go to your room! But I don't want to go to my room! Son, go to your room! Mommy, what would happen if on the way to my room I ran into a pack of wild dogs in the hallway blocking my path? Would I still have to go to my room?

I'm guessing you don't have children? My seven year old asks EXACTLY this type of hypothetical question.

And is it a useful discussion when they ask this type of question?

Or is it a transparent and poor attempt to get out of going to their room?

(Incidentally, I have an 8 month old son. So, yes, I've got a few years before I get to have conversations like this.)

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#72

Post by vidanay »

harryh wrote: post #71
vidanay wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing you don't have children? My seven year old asks EXACTLY this type of hypothetical question.

And is it a useful discussion when they ask this type of question? Or is it a transparent and poor attempt to get out of going to their room? (Incidentally, I have an 8 month old son. So, yes, I've got a few years before I get to have conversations like this.)

Congratulations. It's a fun ride.

Who knows if it's transparent...children's brains function in a completely different universe sometimes.

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#74

Post by studentrob »

I honestly feel that engineers need not fall on their swords over this. The decision is up to them, of course. But ultimately, shareholders would expect someone to comply with the court order should the DOJ win. Note that Yahoo was threatened with daily fines of $250,000 for failing to comply in a FISA court case in 2008, and we only just learned this in 2014 [1].

I don't think we would live in a forced back door world for too long. After another 2, 4, or 8 years, we will eventually realize that giving the government a back door to the iPhone did not give it a back door to the myriad of other encrypted communications tools out there. Terrorists will find other ways to hide their communications.

I really don't want to see Apple lose this case, or any sort of anti-encryption bill. I also wouldn't want to see someone throw away working at Apple over it. Apple can maintain its integrity by complying with the law as it has publicly stated. Engineers can remain true to an employer they respect knowing said employer did everything they could to resist the government. There aren't many great employers out there like this. Don't take it for granted.

That's just my 2c.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-lawsu...

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#77

Post by simoncion »

harryh wrote: post #71
vidanay wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing you don't have children? My seven year old asks EXACTLY this type of hypothetical question.

And is it a useful discussion when they ask this type of question? Or is it a transparent and poor attempt to get out of going to their room? (Incidentally, I have an 8 month old son. So, yes, I've got a few years before I get to have conversations like this.)

The way we feel out the boundaries of a restriction is not infrequently to imagine an extreme but not impossible scenario and ask if the restriction would apply. People who fail to do this (especially when creating new restrictions everyone in Congress>) often end up very unpleasantly surprised down the line.

So, the reply to the last question in your mother/child conversation is likely: "No. You would not be required to do so. However, there are presently no known obstructions between you and the door to your room. Go to your room now, lest I find you in contempt of Mother.".

Simple, right? Right.

So, make your commentary more productive in the future, please. :)

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#79

Post by studentrob »

kstenerud wrote: post #26

Taking this further down the rabbit hole: Suppose that only about 5 people can do what the FBI wants done. Suppose all 5 refuse, to the point of quitting Apple. Does the FBI now compel them to return to Apple and write the software or go to jail? And what if one of those engineers says that he doesn't actually know how to do it; Apple only thought he could, but he actually can't. Now we get into territory of proving…

They could be fined hundreds of thousands daily for refusing to act. We recently found out this happened to Yahoo in 2008 [1] via the FISA court. Apple shareholders wouldn't like that.

I'm pretty sure Tim Cook and his lawyer mean it when they say they will comply with the law. Apple engineers need not worry so much about quitting their jobs over this. If I were there I would stick with Tim Cook. Consider,

If Apple loses this case, this becomes a gigantic public debate where we scramble to enact legislation that removes this power from the government.

If Apple wins this case, and the government pursues anti-encryption laws, this becomes a gigantic public debate.

If the case is delayed for 2 years and goes to the supreme court, this becomes a gigantic public debate.

Regardless, since this is in the public sphere, whether-or-not-we-put-back-doors-in-phones is going to become a gigantic public debate.

The only way it doesn't become a big debate is if Obama comes out and says he's been informed on the issue and now realizes encryption in our phones is, on balance, a good thing.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-lawsu...

Re: Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist

#80

Post by harryh »

simoncion wrote: post #77
harryh wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And is it a useful discussion when they ask this type of question? Or is it a transparent and poor attempt to get out of going to their room? (Incidentally, I have an 8 month old son. So, yes, I've got a few years before I get to have conversations like this.)

The way we feel out the boundaries of a restriction is not infrequently to imagine an extreme but not impossible scenario and ask if the restriction would apply. People who fail to do this (especially when creating new restrictions everyone in Congress>) often end up very unpleasantly surprised down the line. So, the reply to the last question in your mother/child conversation is likely: "No. You would not be require…

If you'll look back upthread you'll see that my first comment very much mirrors your "presently no known obstructions" rebuttal.
Post reply on HN