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

Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 106 posts

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#81

Post by zer01 »

saurik wrote: post #72
zer01 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair points, though to be fair the iOS platform is by and large the most secure mobile platform we have (please correct me if I'm wrong, you absolutely know better than I). Still, as long as the backdoor remains, it will always be possible to carry out malicious updates like this. As far as I understand the secure enclave has been updated a couple times since it's introduction, so I legitimately hope this was a v1, w…

I think Apple in general and Tim Cook in specific are highly moral people: I think they are truly looking at security as a way to make the world a better place; in discussions I have had with employees at Apple, they truly do attempt to build systems where even they don't have access to your information... only at the same time, but somehow from the other side of their mouth, when questioned about their ability to do…

Agreed, I'm extremely glad this is being done in such a public fashion. It's important to have transparency about these issues.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#82

Post by acqq »

rrego wrote: post #79
acqq wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he only thing any of us are missing is the 4096-bit RSA encryption key used to sign the firmware. Ah, so Apple's encryption does actually work. That's the essence of the good encryption: everything is known, except the key. You are not supposed to have it. FBI, hopefully, isn't supposed to have it too. That's why we have laws. Checks and balances and stuff. Laws made for specific cases, not "we can do anything."

You're really missing the point. Yes the only relevant code that is going to be run on that device will code signed by Apple. I don't think FBI will have direct access to this "key". The FBI wants Apple to create "malicious" code/update/software version that would allow for multiple decryption attempts among other things. Apple CAN comply with these requests, probably easily. However, by doing so they will destroy tr…

I don't think you are responding to my post? At least I can't see which part of my post you comment, that is, what I am missing.

The issue here is if All Writs is a good legal basis for the precedent of "change your product."

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#83

Post by saurik »

pfg wrote: post #78
saurik wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is being asked to create a firmware version without brute force rate-limiting. This is a one line of code change for Apple and would take them a few minutes. FWIW, there are people in the iOS jailbreaking community who could do this without the source code rather quickly. I'll even go so far as to say that we actually already have all the tools for this lying around for the iPhone 4, and with only minimal cha…

I think there are a lot of conflating issues in this discussion. Firmware signing and how updates are delivered are one thing. I would argue that having only one possible adversary is preferable to everyone being able to create firmware that runs on your device. If there's a practical and secure approach that would allow users to install only firmware updates they approve of, I'd be all for that[1]. In the end - plea…

> Speaking as a developer. I'm not qualified to answer this for sure, but my gut feeling is that such a feature in the hands of typical end-users might actually be a bad thing for security.

I think users should be allowed to make the security tradeoffs they consider relevant. Many people leave a key to the door of their house somewhere outside but nearby, yet I don't think the people who build locks should decide that that is never acceptable and decide to play parent and come up with a solution to this problem: I would prefer people to be informed about the tradeoffs they are making, but they should be allowed to do what they want. Meanwhile, this enables the people who want more security than "I trust Apple, all of Apple's employees, Apple's security from hostile third parties, and the government under which Apple does business" to go "above and beyond".

> That's why I think calling this a backdoor isn't a fair assessment.

I am using this term because Apple is using this term: they said "They [the FBI] have asked us [Apple] to build a backdoor to the iPhone." when what the result would be would still require brute forcing a passcode to get the data in question. They make it sound extremely hard, but in fact it is really easy for them to do this: it is a single line of code changed; what makes it possible for them to do this is not that they haven't bothered to build it, it is that they are moral enough to not want to do it, and they are the only people with the key... but the key, fundamentally, is equivalent to the power the FBI wants. The FBI could "build" this backdoor for themselves if Apple handed them that key.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#84

Post by chroma »

acqq wrote: post #5

In Tim Cook's words, from his latest letter to the employees: "Some advocates of the government’s order want us to roll back data protections to iOS 7, which we released in September 2013. Starting with iOS 8, we began encrypting data in a way that not even the iPhone itself can read without the user’s passcode, so if it is lost or stolen, our personal data, conversations, financial and health information are far mor…

Your Cook quote is DH3 on the disagreement hierarchy.[1] I agree with it, but it doesn't engage with any arguments for or against the court order.

> Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth? I think it's far more likely that he believes what he says he believes.

As much as the HN crowd likes to side with Apple on this matter, reasonable people can disagree about what's best. I hope Gates's position causes people to reflect on why they have the opinion they do. Gates doesn't have some shady ulterior motive. He's simply stating his opinion on the matter, and using some hastily-conceived analogies to explain it to the general public. That's all.

1. http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#85

Post by camillomiller »

saurik wrote: post #63
camillomiller wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely upside down. Can all Apple haters for once put down their haters' hat and try and be reasonable for the good of everybody? You phrased all that just to get to the conclusion that Apple is an over-controlling company imposing rules on otherwise super tech savvy users. Well sorry to break the news for you, but people decide on their own which smartphone to buy. Globally, most of the time, it's an And…

As long as you don't care if someone can attempt to pull the data from your phone like this, then sure: go ahead and buy that phone. The people generally in these threads, however, and apparently the opinion of Apple itself, is that the FBI should not be able to get the data off of this device; as it stands, Apple can guarantee their eventual success. > Better, they can even root it! Make it even more insecure! Insta…

> This makes no sense. Sure: someone can make their device less secure if they want. I absolutely support you doing that.

Well yeah, I guessed so. People in Cupertino probably think that's basically your mission :D (I don't, though). What I wanted to say is that building a security platform that completely locks you out of the device you're building is 1) Hard 2) full of political and legal implications. Even then, Apple is the only manufacturer with such a clear roadmap in that. Why are they the only one to be held so strongly accountable for building this king of security while Google Android phone can be snooped upon in an extremely easy way? When they're less secure by design?

That was my objection.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#86

Post by acqq »

chroma wrote: post #84
acqq wrote: post #5

In Tim Cook's words, from his latest letter to the employees: "Some advocates of the government’s order want us to roll back data protections to iOS 7, which we released in September 2013. Starting with iOS 8, we began encrypting data in a way that not even the iPhone itself can read without the user’s passcode, so if it is lost or stolen, our personal data, conversations, financial and health information are far mor…

Your Cook quote is DH3 on the disagreement hierarchy.[1] I agree with it, but it doesn't engage with any arguments for or against the court order. > Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks. Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth? I think it's far more likely that he believes what he says he believ…

> > Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

> Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth?

Check which companies sided with Apple this time and which didn't, then compare with some other older cases, for example after Snowden's revelations, then you tell me how you see the current state this time.

Almost certainly the phone doesn't contain anything relevant: it was just a business phone of the killer who actually took care to destroy his private phone and computer, the backup data out of the phone is already owned by the FBI and they just clumsily locked themselves out.

Even if I can imagine Gates believes what he says the context matters and shouldn't be left unmentioned. Interests and affiliations of somebody influential making the public statement are certainly important to mention. Also to compare, Cook was almost presented guilty for trying to preserve the products of his company.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#87

Post by saurik »

acqq wrote: post #65
saurik wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes mere minutes for us to crack the 4- digit passcode on the iPhone 4 (which I only specify as that's where we were last able to easily do this in the jailbreak community; it might be faster now), and most people likely don't use terribly strong passwords; the FBI might also have "leads" on what the password is, but not good enough ones that they feel confident dealing with ten attempts. This is a backdoor to t…

> It takes mere minutes for us to crack the 4- digit passcode on the iPhone 4 Please make it then for iPhone 5C. You would do the world a favor. If you claim you don't have the needed RSA key, then you confirm that the encryption actually works. And you know that your "tool" wouldn't work on the copy of the encrypted data, too. Nice for consumers, isn't it, hardware-dependent functioning encryption by Apple.

I don't... you just seem really confused here :(. You are conflating the key used to sign the data on the disk with the key used to sign a software update for the system; the FBI here wants firmware for the device, signed to work on this device, that will allow them to brute force the PIN code (or password) used to generate the disk encryption key. I am saying that the actual software is something that many people in the community could build, and would require almost no effort for Apple to produce. The only reason I, in fact, can't do this, is because I don't have a key that Apple is sitting in possession of right now: the key that is used to sign these firmware updates. That one key is the backdoor, as that key is the only thing standing between someone and accomplishing what the FBI wants, and it will let you do not only this but all kinds of other evil things you want to do to anyone's phone.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#88

Post by rrego »

acqq wrote: post #82
rrego wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're really missing the point. Yes the only relevant code that is going to be run on that device will code signed by Apple. I don't think FBI will have direct access to this "key". The FBI wants Apple to create "malicious" code/update/software version that would allow for multiple decryption attempts among other things. Apple CAN comply with these requests, probably easily. However, by doing so they will destroy tr…

I don't think you are responding to my post? At least I can't see which part of my post you comment, that is, what I am missing. The issue here is if All Writs is a good legal basis for the precedent of "change your product."

Ah. I'm conflating multiple threads. I was referring to this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11157666

I agree with you about All Writs, I don't see any precedent for "change your product". Thanks for pointing my mistake out.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#89

Post by acqq »

saurik wrote: post #87
acqq wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It takes mere minutes for us to crack the 4- digit passcode on the iPhone 4 Please make it then for iPhone 5C. You would do the world a favor. If you claim you don't have the needed RSA key, then you confirm that the encryption actually works. And you know that your "tool" wouldn't work on the copy of the encrypted data, too. Nice for consumers, isn't it, hardware-dependent functioning encryption by Apple.

I don't... you just seem really confused here :(. You are conflating the key used to sign the data on the disk with the key used to sign a software update for the system; the FBI here wants firmware for the device, signed to work on this device, that will allow them to brute force the PIN code (or password) used to generate the disk encryption key. I am saying that the actual software is something that many people in…

And "that one key" isn't a few bytes in your mother's basement, it's something with which all the Apple's products, hundreds of millions, are secured and are to be secured and which you should not have, FBI should not have, and should not be misused without proper laws made. This time, instead, All Writs is attempted to be used.

It's wrong and dangerous, not because only the key, but because the way the whole issue is constructed, the demand to Apple is to "just" change the iOS (Apple's product) "because we say so and we can." Dangerous precedent.

It's not "give us the data from the phone." FBI has the data already. They are encrypted, and FBI locked themselves out. Bad luck.

Re: Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone

#90

Post by mathetic »

Bill Gates led a company that shipped products with poor security for decades just to maintain their first mover advantage. He actively and deliberately took part in abusing the fact that security is not the first thing assessed in a product.

He might be a brilliant man, but he clearly doesn't have the vision when it comes to security and privacy.

Post reply on HN