What Is Blood Sugar And Why Is It...
How it Works17 mins ago
Apple Refuses To Create Iphone Back Door
Background news story here:
http://
Apple statement here:
http://
Is Apple correct to defy their Government's wishes in this way? Or should they do everything possible to help investigate this act of terrorism?
http://
Apple statement here:
http://
Is Apple correct to defy their Government's wishes in this way? Or should they do everything possible to help investigate this act of terrorism?
Answers
Good job the people working at Bletchley Park didn't have all this trouble.
23:41 Wed 17th Feb 2016
The Great God of secrecy and anonymity (the hiding place of cowards) is the wonderful boast of Apple and their hi-tech pals. It will be a different story if thousands of people get blown up and we learn later that the security forces could have prevented it - if only they had been allowed access to the culprit's secret and evil plans/
There was a story in the press not long ago. A man had bought a airbook pro just weeks before he died. His widow couldn't use it because it was password protected and Apple refused to reset it even though she showed the death certificate and his Will which left everything to her.
She didn't want to access her late husband's documents, she wanted it restored to factory settings so that she could either use it herself or sell it
She didn't want to access her late husband's documents, she wanted it restored to factory settings so that she could either use it herself or sell it
I have an iPhone. I have to say, I'm surprised Apple could not get into it if they wanted to. I didn't buy it on the basis that they couldn't, and can't remember seeing that used as a marketing ploy.
I'm also surprised that the UK Gov can't get into it, let alone the US Gov! One might think that "surely" it's simply a case of taking the hard drive out of it and attaching it to a different computer that allows them to read it - or even just cloning the hard drive up to 100 times to allow up to 1000 brute force attacks to get in.
I work on the assumption that I might lose my phone or get it stolen, and somebody else might be able to easily get into it, e.g. somebody that had seen me enter the pin before stealing the phone.
In this terrorism case, suppose the US Gov had CCTV of the terrorist entering their pin into the phone shortly before committing the attack - any problem with using that footage to gain access to the phone? No, none whatsoever. I don't consider it "that big a deal" that the Government wants to access a murdering terrorist's phone data!
I'm also surprised that the UK Gov can't get into it, let alone the US Gov! One might think that "surely" it's simply a case of taking the hard drive out of it and attaching it to a different computer that allows them to read it - or even just cloning the hard drive up to 100 times to allow up to 1000 brute force attacks to get in.
I work on the assumption that I might lose my phone or get it stolen, and somebody else might be able to easily get into it, e.g. somebody that had seen me enter the pin before stealing the phone.
In this terrorism case, suppose the US Gov had CCTV of the terrorist entering their pin into the phone shortly before committing the attack - any problem with using that footage to gain access to the phone? No, none whatsoever. I don't consider it "that big a deal" that the Government wants to access a murdering terrorist's phone data!
There's plenty of evidence if one goes looking for it that companies providing data services have (until recently) been happy to go along with recommendations from the security agencies as to the level of encryption provided. In other words, pretty good, but no so good that we can't crack it if we need to.
Now thanks to Mr Snowden, all that's been laid out in the open and companies such as Apple have responded as they see fit.
I subscribe to the view that if you have nothing to hide, the agencies have no reason to investigate you further than reviewing your meta-data, then discarding it and moving on.
Rather that if it assists stopping the maniacs bent to harm to innocent civilians. No, not the Russians, the other lot.
Now thanks to Mr Snowden, all that's been laid out in the open and companies such as Apple have responded as they see fit.
I subscribe to the view that if you have nothing to hide, the agencies have no reason to investigate you further than reviewing your meta-data, then discarding it and moving on.
Rather that if it assists stopping the maniacs bent to harm to innocent civilians. No, not the Russians, the other lot.
Dogsbody,
If you don't want a secure phone, then don't buy one.
The rest of us who don't want our personal conversations and messages read by anyone else, should be able to have that.
The Security Services know who we contact on FaceTime and iMessage, just not the contents of our coversations.
The argument about nothing to hide is spurious. The public would not agree to bugs planted in all our houses that can be eavesdropped by the Government. This is just that, an unjustified invasion of our privacy.
If you don't want a secure phone, then don't buy one.
The rest of us who don't want our personal conversations and messages read by anyone else, should be able to have that.
The Security Services know who we contact on FaceTime and iMessage, just not the contents of our coversations.
The argument about nothing to hide is spurious. The public would not agree to bugs planted in all our houses that can be eavesdropped by the Government. This is just that, an unjustified invasion of our privacy.
There's an obvious problem with this story...
If the FBI wants to access text messages, they don't need to access the phone. They could subpoena this from the owner's service provider. Messages are stored on central servers...as well as client machines (phones).
Apple are correct in this.
Once they give way here, it's not a great leap for oppressive regimes to sue Apple to provide the same back door into opponents phones. And be think of this - once the back door is created, how could Apple be sure it would remain secured?
It would effectively compromise ever iOS device on the market.
Furthermore, once the back door was developed, it's doesn't take a lot of imagination to see the code to be reversed engineered enabling government agencies to remotely raid phone data.
Nice one Tim.
Right decision.
If the FBI wants to access text messages, they don't need to access the phone. They could subpoena this from the owner's service provider. Messages are stored on central servers...as well as client machines (phones).
Apple are correct in this.
Once they give way here, it's not a great leap for oppressive regimes to sue Apple to provide the same back door into opponents phones. And be think of this - once the back door is created, how could Apple be sure it would remain secured?
It would effectively compromise ever iOS device on the market.
Furthermore, once the back door was developed, it's doesn't take a lot of imagination to see the code to be reversed engineered enabling government agencies to remotely raid phone data.
Nice one Tim.
Right decision.
> Once they give way here, it's not a great leap for oppressive regimes to sue Apple to provide the same back door into opponents phones. And be think of this - once the back door is created, how could Apple be sure it would remain secured?
It's already not a great leap, since Apple has effectively admitted that it could write such a system but won't. Maybe they won't write it for the US Government, but China might be a bit more demanding ...
It's already not a great leap, since Apple has effectively admitted that it could write such a system but won't. Maybe they won't write it for the US Government, but China might be a bit more demanding ...
Ellipsis
As long as it remains unwritten, that's good enough for me.
I'm actually really impressed that the FBI cannot access iPhones. If they can't, then the scrote who may (at some point in the future pick up my phone when I drunkenly leave it in a bar in Covent Garden, will likewise not be able to access my data.
As long as it remains unwritten, that's good enough for me.
I'm actually really impressed that the FBI cannot access iPhones. If they can't, then the scrote who may (at some point in the future pick up my phone when I drunkenly leave it in a bar in Covent Garden, will likewise not be able to access my data.
Sp,
// they don't need to access the phone. They could subpoena this from the owner's service provider. Messages are stored on central servers...as well as client machines (phones). //
I don't think you understand what encription is. They can access the data but it is scrambled into an unreadable mess inbetween the two end phones.
Elipsis,
The NSA and GCHQ (and anyone else) have been able to steal peoples data by default for decades. Which is how they managed to lose so much of their own sensitive data. Apple have designed their services so the are incredibly safe from unwanted prying. Deliberately safe. They do not want to deliberately nobble them to be insecure again.
This case is being used by the FBI and other agencies to influence legislation being considered in the US. The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime.
// they don't need to access the phone. They could subpoena this from the owner's service provider. Messages are stored on central servers...as well as client machines (phones). //
I don't think you understand what encription is. They can access the data but it is scrambled into an unreadable mess inbetween the two end phones.
Elipsis,
The NSA and GCHQ (and anyone else) have been able to steal peoples data by default for decades. Which is how they managed to lose so much of their own sensitive data. Apple have designed their services so the are incredibly safe from unwanted prying. Deliberately safe. They do not want to deliberately nobble them to be insecure again.
This case is being used by the FBI and other agencies to influence legislation being considered in the US. The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime.
Gromit
Ah...thanks. I thought they were after texts and mails. I see your point.
However, I think there is still value (to security services) of accessing encrypted data in that they can establish links to surviving terrorist cells.
However, putting the onus on Apple or other OEMs to provide an unlimited gateway, is not the way to go.
Ah...thanks. I thought they were after texts and mails. I see your point.
However, I think there is still value (to security services) of accessing encrypted data in that they can establish links to surviving terrorist cells.
However, putting the onus on Apple or other OEMs to provide an unlimited gateway, is not the way to go.
Sp.
Sms text messages are transmitted via satellites, and can be intercepted. Here, we are talking about iMessages, and FaceTime audio and video. These services work via iCloud, and are encripted by default.
FaceTime audio and video are not recorded and stored by the iphone. So there will be no useful data to be found anyway. iMessages are stored on the iphone, but the FBI cannot know if any iMessages were sent or received, or if they were received, whether they have been deleted or not.
The FBI request is disingenuous. It is not anything on this phone they are particularly interested in, it is the ability to get into everyones phones in the future, that this request is aimed at establishing.
Sms text messages are transmitted via satellites, and can be intercepted. Here, we are talking about iMessages, and FaceTime audio and video. These services work via iCloud, and are encripted by default.
FaceTime audio and video are not recorded and stored by the iphone. So there will be no useful data to be found anyway. iMessages are stored on the iphone, but the FBI cannot know if any iMessages were sent or received, or if they were received, whether they have been deleted or not.
The FBI request is disingenuous. It is not anything on this phone they are particularly interested in, it is the ability to get into everyones phones in the future, that this request is aimed at establishing.
> the scrote who may (at some point in the future pick up my phone when I drunkenly leave it in a bar in Covent Garden, will likewise not be able to access my data.
Do not rely on this! For all the iPhone's supposed security, it's only protected by a PIN! If the scrote saw you drunkenly enter that PIN then they have an easy way in. Even without it, if you keep your iPhone reasonably clean then your fingerprints leave a pattern where the PIN is entered, and it becomes guessable. They either get in or they brick your phone. They don't have the problem that the FBI has ... that they must get in.
> The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime.
Were there any accomplices? Is there evidence of anything else being planned? The contents of the phone may help answer questions like this.
Do not rely on this! For all the iPhone's supposed security, it's only protected by a PIN! If the scrote saw you drunkenly enter that PIN then they have an easy way in. Even without it, if you keep your iPhone reasonably clean then your fingerprints leave a pattern where the PIN is entered, and it becomes guessable. They either get in or they brick your phone. They don't have the problem that the FBI has ... that they must get in.
> The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime.
Were there any accomplices? Is there evidence of anything else being planned? The contents of the phone may help answer questions like this.
Gromit
"The NSA and GCHQ (and anyone else) have been able to steal peoples data by default for decades" - no need to tell me stuff that I'm pretty sure I knew a long time before you ever did.
"Which is how they managed to lose so much of their own sensitive data" - no, they lost a load of data because a trusted employee broke ranks and committed a heinous crime of theft. Thanks goodness he was American - the rest of the Five Eyes partners would have never have lived it down
"Apple have designed their services so the are incredibly safe from unwanted prying. Deliberately safe. They do not want to deliberately nobble them to be insecure again". I think not - Apple think they can claim the moral high ground by doing this - nothing more - besides its good for sales business (so far), especially amongst ISIS foot-soldiers.
"This case is being used by the FBI and other agencies to influence legislation being considered in the US. The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime". Oh dear, can you be so naive? - do you not think that there just might be some contacts worth investigating to try to keep you and Mrs Gromit safe the next time you visit London?
"The NSA and GCHQ (and anyone else) have been able to steal peoples data by default for decades" - no need to tell me stuff that I'm pretty sure I knew a long time before you ever did.
"Which is how they managed to lose so much of their own sensitive data" - no, they lost a load of data because a trusted employee broke ranks and committed a heinous crime of theft. Thanks goodness he was American - the rest of the Five Eyes partners would have never have lived it down
"Apple have designed their services so the are incredibly safe from unwanted prying. Deliberately safe. They do not want to deliberately nobble them to be insecure again". I think not - Apple think they can claim the moral high ground by doing this - nothing more - besides its good for sales business (so far), especially amongst ISIS foot-soldiers.
"This case is being used by the FBI and other agencies to influence legislation being considered in the US. The perpetrators of this crime have committed their atrocity, and they themselves are dead. So the content of any messages (they don't even know if any messages exist) will not help prevent the crime". Oh dear, can you be so naive? - do you not think that there just might be some contacts worth investigating to try to keep you and Mrs Gromit safe the next time you visit London?
Ellipsis
Actually - I have a PIN on my iPhone, but I've opted to go for a six digit number, not the usual four digit.
...but I only have to use that when I reboot my phone. Normally I open it with the fingerprint scanner.
So the scrote would either have to be standing right behind me on the off chance that I reboot my phone (unlikely)...and remember my six figure passcode (very unlikely). Alternatively, he or she could cut off my thumb (seriously unlikely), but ultimately - all this is moot...because when I'm out and about, my iPhone stay in my pocket, because I have an Apple Watch. If I get an email, text message or Facebook/Twitter notification, I check it from my wrist, rather than getting my phone out.
...of course, I say this with a smug look on my face, whilst I'm concurrently being burgled at home because the security on our house is no where near as comprehensive as that on my iPhone.
Actually - I have a PIN on my iPhone, but I've opted to go for a six digit number, not the usual four digit.
...but I only have to use that when I reboot my phone. Normally I open it with the fingerprint scanner.
So the scrote would either have to be standing right behind me on the off chance that I reboot my phone (unlikely)...and remember my six figure passcode (very unlikely). Alternatively, he or she could cut off my thumb (seriously unlikely), but ultimately - all this is moot...because when I'm out and about, my iPhone stay in my pocket, because I have an Apple Watch. If I get an email, text message or Facebook/Twitter notification, I check it from my wrist, rather than getting my phone out.
...of course, I say this with a smug look on my face, whilst I'm concurrently being burgled at home because the security on our house is no where near as comprehensive as that on my iPhone.
Latest Posts
News50 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Businesses Warn Of Job Losses Threat As...
News100 mins ago
News103 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles110 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.