Is this not effectively the same as a back door from a software point of view? Legitimate question because I don't know. I'm not a software engineer.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered to Help FBI Recover Data From San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone 5c
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Although I have nothing to hide I am happy my passcode is well over 10 characters. I may waste a few seconds every time I don't use Touch ID but I can't be brute forced.
The thing everyone always ignores is that Apple didn't invent encryption and forcing Apple to put backdoors in won't do away with the ability for people who REALLY want to hide stuff (i.e. terrorists and criminals) to encrypt things beyond what the law can access. Those people will simply do a small amount of research and load up any number of other apps that provide encryption (for instance, Whatsapp is adding encryption right now... but I'm sure there are literally hindreds of apps you can get for Android).
The ONLY thing that weakening iPhone's stock encryption does is hurt the privacy of normal, everyday citizens...
The ONLY thing that weakening iPhone's stock encryption does is hurt the privacy of normal, everyday citizens...
A backdoor is a simple, quick, secret method to access a system. There's nothing secret about this nor is it necessarily quick or simple. How does this fit the definition of a backdoor?
If you ask me, this is the way it should be expected to be done. Being compelled to help law enforcement do their job is far from being unconstitutional, provided the police have a sound reason and a warrant. If Apple discovers a backdoor themselves, they themselves can use it help the police catch Potential Terrorist X. And then, if they so want, they can patch it out after the fact.
There is no such thing as 100% perfect security. There will always be ways to crack into someone's phone. Apple, being an expert of their own software, will obviously be the first bunch law enforcement hits up to ask for help to get in. That's fine.
...but demanding they place flaws into their software so it can be accessed at any time? No, that's not.
Precisely. This is the "Key." ( No Pun intended.) Very benign actions could be viewed as "reasonable." I predict nothing will come of this.
Because if Apple has a way of disabling the 10 limit erase, or allow unlimited passwords to be thrown at it via a software tweak, that's a back door that someone other than Apple could figure out some day. Doesn't mean it will be cracked tomorrow, but if Apple isn't truthful when they say they can't do anything to help cops get in, bad guys can also get in.
There are ways to stop terrorists without compromising the privacy of law abiding citizens. Not to mention, the information on the phone is probably useless by now. Any contacts and phone numbers used to communicate likely changed after the shooting happened.
Make no mistake, this is a political move, and the motivation here is to set precedent for the next time they want to get into someone's phone.
thank God for cell phones, in the bad old days prior to their existence we were unable to solve any crimes ... Wait, what?
Law enforcement has gotten addicted to their easy access to data and now that it's drying up we're seeing panic and tantrums. It's a shame. They didn't have access to private conversations prior to mobile devices (unless they had a wiretap in advance) and they don't have it now, go back to traditional investigation techniques.
The really scary part here is if Apple's assistance is requiring handing over enough source and architecture info that the government is able to exploit the system without Apple knowing how, effectively being able to create their own zero day and compromise us all. As said in first post, stay strong Apple.
Law enforcement has gotten addicted to their easy access to data and now that it's drying up we're seeing panic and tantrums. It's a shame. They didn't have access to private conversations prior to mobile devices (unless they had a wiretap in advance) and they don't have it now, go back to traditional investigation techniques.
The really scary part here is if Apple's assistance is requiring handing over enough source and architecture info that the government is able to exploit the system without Apple knowing how, effectively being able to create their own zero day and compromise us all. As said in first post, stay strong Apple.
Neither am I. But to me, a backdoor would be something left open in software on purpose for easy access. That's quite a bit different from looking for a flaw to exploit to get into someone's system.
In this case, Apple can give no guarantees that they'll be able to access this guy's phone, nor can it be held against them if they fail. But they do have to try.
In the end, there is no difference between getting in via a flaw or a true back door. What's to say the "flaw" wasn't known and was intended to be a back door of sorts? Nobody knows iOS and the iPhone hardware like Apple. They, more than anyone, would know how to generate a set of events that could trigger *something* to happen. I don't trust Apple or any company fully when they say our data is secure and there is no way to get at it.
Here's to hoping Apple sticks to their guns. I am glad to support a company that is constantly protecting consumers from breaches of our privacy
I'm no expert in encryption at all, so sorry if this is way off.
Given that some features and settings are available with the phone locked, and that a locked phone can determine whether it should erase data after failed attempts and how long to wait between failed attempts, doesn't that indicate those settings exist and can be checked outside the encryption? Therefore the software can surely be manipulated at this stage?
Would love someone to explain this...
Given that some features and settings are available with the phone locked, and that a locked phone can determine whether it should erase data after failed attempts and how long to wait between failed attempts, doesn't that indicate those settings exist and can be checked outside the encryption? Therefore the software can surely be manipulated at this stage?
Would love someone to explain this...
Sorry to burst the cowboy bubble, but there's actual data on this, and it doesn't agree with this particular NRA mantra.
- A good guy with a gun is statistically more likely to either shoot another good guy or be shot by another good guy than he is to actually shoot a bad guy.
- A bad guy with gun scenario ends 2-3% of the time by a good guy with a gun, and 52% of the time of the bad guy's own accord.
- A 1% increase in gun ownership results in a 0.9% increase in gun deaths (and no, it's not the bad guys doing the dying).
And yes, I'm for the 2nd Amendment. The entire second amendment, including the often conveniently omitted bit about a well regulated militia.
But we digress...
There's an old saying in computer security that if you have access to the hardware, then all bets are off. There is no system that cannot be cracked if the person doing the cracking has access to the hardware itself. A true backdoor would offer someone quick, simple and secretive access to a system even remotely. This is not a backdoor.
There were hundreds of terrorist attacks that happened before cell phones even existed.
Terrorists will find a way.
Do you still wanna give up your security/privacy?
That's true. You'll never be 100% secure, so long as you're using someone else's product to connect to the internet. If someone wants to get at your stuff, they can and probably will find a way to do it.
No, it's not. Apple has no backdoors. And if the government forces them to create one where it didn't exist before the government has taken down a whole company by destroying one of their biggest competitive advantages.
Pound sand FBI.
You're confusing one situation for another.
Though this could eventually be used as justification for backdoors later, right now all the FBI is doing is handing them a phone, and saying "hey, crack this for us".
Thank you Apple for standing your ground.
While I have no love for crazy islamic nuts, or any religious nuts, I do not think everyone should lose their liberty because of them.
Look at what we have to put up with at the airport with the TSA, fondling little girls because they might be terrorists.
I think we lost enough freedom and liberty already.
While I have no love for crazy islamic nuts, or any religious nuts, I do not think everyone should lose their liberty because of them.
Look at what we have to put up with at the airport with the TSA, fondling little girls because they might be terrorists.
I think we lost enough freedom and liberty already.
I hope you read the opening of that whack-o article you linked to. I really hope you don't seriously believe the Twin Towers came down due to added explosions because the planes could not do it alone. It takes serious amounts of tin-foil hats to believe that.
[doublepost=1455682024][/doublepost]
You still have to have the passcode to decrypt the data. I am guessing Apple could do a special build to disable the 10 try limit but you would still need to get the cypher keys and you have to have the passcode for those.
Yeah, because it worked out really well for all those people carrying guns in the Twin Towers.
[doublepost=1455682481][/doublepost]I don't get why Apple make a big song and dance about this whole encryption thing when your iCloud data is accessible. Cook talks like it's an important principle but isn't it really a PR exercise?
Last edited: