Apple engineers may quit if forced by FBI to unlock iPhones

[Trolle_BE]

I dont care if they unlock the phone or not.
sure the fbi can spy on almost every phone then but if you dont have nothing to hide why should you be afraid?
I rather have the fbi looking thru my phone,traveldata etc instead of being blown to bits by some suicidebomber or a terrorist attack.
I live in belgium near brussels and with the terrorist constantly popping up here it can only help if authorities can look into their encrypted phones.

 

[Burty117]

Every time I see this topic come up, I shake my head in awe thinking about how many people want to protect these terrorists that committed this horrible crime. If I knew how to, I would have done it even before anyone had to ask.

No one's protecting the terrorists, the terrorist we took this phone from is dead... If we are protecting them, we did a pretty bad job...

You are over valuating yourself. You are a nobody. No one cares about your crappy life, your family videos, or your photos of underage teens. You would not be looked at even if you tried. This goes for 99.999% of people. You all have to get over yourselves. However, go kill people, then you can know that your encryption was worth it.

No one is "over valuating" themselves here, nobody likes knowing that their phone isn't secure. I think I speak on behalf of most people here when I say, I don't care how valuable I am, I don't care how unimportant you think I am. I still don't want my phone to have a back door that anyone can use to see all my stuff. Period.

Do you also object their privacy being violated when it comes to authority checking their home, their mail, their associates, their firearm purchase history, their passports, their travel history, etc etc?

Yeah again, this is a single person this would affect, the terrorist, they're not going to search everyone's house at the exact same time, they're also not storing the key to everyone's car. This is very different from creating a back door to one of the worlds most sold mobile phones.

As Edward Snowden and a few others have reported, the FBI could break into this phone if need be, they're not even trying though, they want this back door into all iOS devices and that is simply wrong...

I dont care if they unlock the phone or not.

It's not about 1 phone, it's about all iOS devices...

sure the fbi can spy on almost every phone then but if you dont have nothing to hide why should you be afraid?

It's not about being afraid, I'm certainly not afraid, my life is basically an open book by using facebook anyway. Me and many others still don't want a back door into our phones.

I rather have the fbi looking thru my phone,traveldata etc instead of being blown to bits by some suicidebomber or a terrorist attack.

Yeah, I don't think the FBI looking through your Travel Data and your Phone is a very productive use of their time or will help find the terrorists that are going to blow you to bits...

I live in belgium near brussels and with the terrorist constantly popping up here it can only help if authorities can look into their encrypted phones.

I live in London, we've also had over the years buses explode, bomb threats in the underground etc...
Giving away the little privacy you had on your phone is not going to help find these terrorists before it's to late, it just isn't.

Then you can think about what else this could entail. Imagine a government that can listen in and read everything you do on your phone, they would know who you're voting for, what you are for or against, they can use this information to manipulate you and find ways around. That is simply not good news for anyone...

 

[Nobina]

You did nothing wrong so you have nothing to hide and because of that it's ok to be spied on - some people's logic.

 

[TopSliceofBread]

This topic is so f*%king annoying and people especially some commenting here are even more-so. Why does EVERYthing with most have to be either black or white? Its always none or all with some of you. I'm against them creating a backdoor for them to unlock the phone too but why is literally no one and everyone suggesting a compromise to unlock just that phone?

Why is no one suggesting that maybe apple does the unlock for just that phone based on what has happened. Things such as mass-murder with proof beyond a doubt that the person in question committed that crime should in my opinion be one of those exceptions where everyone cooperates and says yes let justice be done and lets let the victims and the families have closure. But no... everything has to be some damn political footnote, an Im right you're wrong, black or white escapade with no middle ground met.

 

[Burty117]

This topic is so f*%king annoying and people especially some commenting here are even more-so. Why does EVERYthing with most have to be either black or white? Its always none or all with some of you. I'm against them creating a backdoor for them to unlock the phone too but why is literally no one and everyone suggesting a compromise to unlock just that phone?

Why is no one suggesting that maybe apple does the unlock for just that phone based on what has happened.

Because that is NOT what the FBI are asking for, they are asking for a back door into all iOS devices. And yes, the FBI do already posses the technical know how to unlock that single phone, but they want access to all...

Things such as mass-murder with proof beyond a doubt that the person in question committed that crime should in my opinion be one of those exceptions where everyone cooperates and says yes let justice be done and lets let the victims and the families have closure. But no... everything has to be some damn political footnote, an Im right you're wrong, black or white escapade with no middle ground met.

I agree with you, and many more here probably do as well, but again, that is not what the FBI are after, they want a back door to all iOS devices. That's why this is so Black and White, what the FBI want and what Apple and seemingly many people want are literally polar opposites.

 

[seefizzle]

Every time I see this topic come up, I shake my head in awe thinking about how many people want to protect these terrorists that committed this horrible crime. If I knew how to, I would have done it even before anyone had to ask.

The government does not need unfettered access to everyone's phones with a secret back door. As soon as you give access to one governmental agency you have to give it to all governmental agencies, for every government on earth. If we provide a backdoor to the American government, tomorrow Russia knocks on the door and they want a back door too. Immediately after providing a backdoor into the iphone, the backdoor exists for everyone, and anyone who pays attention to this sort of thing knows that nothing is truly safe. These tools would be in hackers and cyber criminal's hands sooner than later.

It's also worth noting that the government already possesses the ability to crack into these phones. What the government wants is easier access to these phones, particularly from their offices. This is a horrible precedent, and you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking otherwise. You're on a tech website, you should know better than what you've posted.

 

[Uncle Al]

Every time I see this topic come up, I shake my head in awe thinking about how many people want to protect these terrorists that committed this horrible crime. If I knew how to, I would have done it even before anyone had to ask.

The government does not need unfettered access to everyone's phones with a secret back door. As soon as you give access to one governmental agency you have to give it to all governmental agencies, for every government on earth. If we provide a backdoor to the American government, tomorrow Russia knocks on the door and they want a back door too. Immediately after providing a backdoor into the iphone, the backdoor exists for everyone, and anyone who pays attention to this sort of thing knows that nothing is truly safe. These tools would be in hackers and cyber criminal's hands sooner than later.

It's also worth noting that the government already possesses the ability to crack into these phones. What the government wants is easier access to these phones, particularly from their offices. This is a horrible precedent, and you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking otherwise. You're on a tech website, you should know better than what you've posted.

Well said, well said indeed!

 

[wiyosaya]

Every time I see this topic come up, I shake my head in awe thinking about how many people want to protect these terrorists that committed this horrible crime. If I knew how to, I would have done it even before anyone had to ask.

Every time I see a response like this, I think about how some people are in favor of making these devices easier to crack and thus vulnerable to terrorists using them for bot nets.

 

[Greg J.]

It's one thing to exercise one's right to lawfully resist government initiatives. It is quite another to reject the rule of law. The line between them seems to get blurrier (or confused or outright rejected) every passing decade. We can already find plenty of cases of Might makes Right. American democracy is taking on aspects of tribalism. Already there are plenty of people that want their way all the time, rather than seek majority rule. Lots of forms of government demonstrate oligarchy, I wonder which one these engineers are unknowingly working America toward. Too bad we can't just switch to Personal-Rights Totalitarianism so we could start working toward democracy again.

 

[Rippleman]

Why do you keep asking that BS question? Search and seizure does not effect everyone else. If a search and seizure of someone's address also unlocks my door, then yes I would object.

So would I, I am not asking that question. Let's try again. Are YOU against the FBI searching the shooters home? mail? gun history? travel history? etc?

 

[Rippleman]

Well, there's a pretty good reason for that. They are essentially asking Apple for a master key to all Apple devices. Giving the FBI something that can break through the security on one IDevice means that they can do it on all others as well. Do you really think that one person is worth millions of people's security?

Given that American's have been getting shafted by their government vastly overstepping their bounds when it comes to privacy, you can't tell me your sitting there without a clue as to how people could be against this. God, I hope your not one of those trained dogs that jump each time someone mentions terrorists. According to the government, they are all over. Reminds me of the cold war, where anyone branded a communist was immediately bad. Kinda funny how that works because America uses many communist systems.

No one cares about your family plans, your video collection, your underage teen pics, or your call history. You are a nobody. Get over yourself.

 

[Rippleman]

You did nothing wrong so you have nothing to hide and because of that it's ok to be spied on - some people's logic.

That is NOT the position of the claim. The claim is... if you are mistakenly spied on (much like a search warrant gone wrong), then you would have nothing to worry about and you can press for claims of damages. However, if a search warrant went wrong, and your house was search and you had operation meth lab, then would WOULD have something worry about. Mistakes happen. If you are an innocent person, you wouldn't care so strongly about the mistakes IF they ever did happen.

 

[Rippleman]

The government does not need unfettered access to everyone's phones with a secret back door. As soon as you give access to one governmental agency you have to give it to all governmental agencies, for every government on earth. If we provide a backdoor to the American government, tomorrow Russia knocks on the door and they want a back door too. Immediately after providing a backdoor into the iphone, the backdoor exists for everyone, and anyone who pays attention to this sort of thing knows that nothing is truly safe. These tools would be in hackers and cyber criminal's hands sooner than later.

It's also worth noting that the government already possesses the ability to crack into these phones. What the government wants is easier access to these phones, particularly from their offices. This is a horrible precedent, and you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking otherwise. You're on a tech website, you should know better than what you've posted.

Your argement sounds like the straw man position argument "they are taking our guns!" lol...

 

[Evernessince]

No one cares about your family plans, your video collection, your underage teen pics, or your call history. You are a nobody. Get over yourself.

/fail troll

I never even talked about any of that. At least try to keep your dunken jaunts to yourself.

 

[Rippleman]

/fail troll

I never even talked about any of that. At least try to keep your dunken jaunts to yourself.

You are making the claim that the FBI want in your phone. I am rejecting your claim based on you being a nobody. Sorry though, if you kill people, then you will be on the list, until then, you are still a nobody.

 

[MadEngineer_nz]

I think we'd all agree that if there was a way to retrieve any data from this one iPhone we'd be fine with it. Too bad for example that they cannot simply trick it into connecting to a previously saved wifi connection so it performs an automatic backup to iCloud, _then_ restore another iPhone from that backup data after performing an iCloud password reset through his (pwnd/employers) email account. The issue is that the data cannot currently be accessed without employing Apple's help resulting in a backdoor that grants access to all iPhones - something that none of us want.

 

[cliffordcooley]

You are making the claim that the FBI want in your phone. I am rejecting your claim based on you being a nobody. Sorry though, if you kill people, then you will be on the list, until then, you are still a nobody.

If you don't believe in keeping anyone honest by keeping them locked out, you are a fool.

 

[Rippleman]

If you don't believe in keeping anyone honest by keeping them locked out, you are a fool.

Doesn't even make sense. Sorry. False equivalency.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Doesn't even make sense. Sorry. False equivalency.

Thank you for this. Labeling a comparison "false equivalency" while stating it didn't make sense in the same sentence. You either understand or you don't. And if you don't, you can't label it one way or the other.

You have officially proven to me you think a badge or political position makes a person honest. The government believes in privacy. They believe it is what keeps them safe from foreign or domestic troubles. It really is a shame you don't understand privacy is every ones right as a defense, not just the governments. Your inability to understand this is a disgrace to our forefathers. You do remember those that fought for our freedoms from oppression? Here you are trading security with a false sense of security, basically the same thing as asking for oppression.

 

[Rippleman]

Thank you for this. Labeling a comparison "false equivalency" while stating it didn't make sense in the same sentence. You either understand or you don't. And if you don't, you can't label it one way or the other.

You have officially proven to me you think a badge or political position makes a person honest. The government believes in privacy. They believe it is what keeps them safe from foreign or domestic troubles. It really is a shame you don't understand privacy is every ones right as a defense, not just the governments. Your inability to understand this is a disgrace to our forefathers. You do remember those that fought for our freedoms from oppression? Here you are trading security with a false sense of security, basically the same thing as asking for oppression.

1) You are incorrect. What you are saying doesn't makes sense BECAUSE of the false equivalency.
2) You are incorrect. I DO NOT believe a badge or political position makes them an honest person. Even if I had, it has nothing to do with this.
3) You are incorrect. If you are claiming privacy, then answer the question: Do you feel the authorities DO NOT have the right to go through a killers house? mail? criminal history? travel history? Why or why not? Privacy is privacy isn't it?
4) You are incorrect. You are a disgrace for standing up for these murders. Shame on you.
5) You are incorrect. This will not as security to any sense. It is only an additional tool to the many that already exist to help prevent, detour, discover, and possibly even stop more crimes that are associated with this particular case.
6) You are incorrect. You are oppressing the rights of the innocent to defend the rights of these killers.

Question: Do you feel terrorists should have the right to privacy after a horrible crime where lives are taken? A simple yes or no will suffice.

 

[Buzzfriendly]

Every time I see this topic come up, I shake my head in awe thinking about how many people want to protect these terrorists that committed this horrible crime. If I knew how to, I would have done it even before anyone had to ask.

Creating a back door in any software puts it at risk of being accessed by less reputable programmers who may take advantage of full access to your phone and its contents.

Killing people to prove a point is a terrible and sad thing to do.

2 wrongs dont make a right.

So, you are against seeing whats in these killers phones.. Ok. What about their house? Their mail? What about their travel history?

Not if it means dropping a nuclear bomb and destroying the neighborhood just to get in the front door. Martin Luther King lost his life because he exercised his right to free speech. Just how many freedoms and rights are you willing to give up just to for the chance there may or may not be information that is useful? Seems rather short sighted and myopic if you ask me.

 

[Rippleman]

Not if it means dropping a nuclear bomb and destroying the neighborhood just to get in the front door. Martin Luther King lost his life because he exercised his right to free speech. Just how many freedoms and rights are you willing to give up just to for the chance there may or may not be information that is useful? Seems rather short sighted and myopic if you ask me.

So in your opinion, the authorities should NOT have access to a killers house, a killers mail, a killers associates, a killers financial history, a killers gun history etc etc? How many rights does one have to give up right?

 

[Sancticide]

You did nothing wrong so you have nothing to hide and because of that it's ok to be spied on - some people's logic.

That is NOT the position of the claim. The claim is... if you are mistakenly spied on (much like a search warrant gone wrong), then you would have nothing to worry about and you can press for claims of damages. However, if a search warrant went wrong, and your house was search and you had operation meth lab, then would WOULD have something worry about. Mistakes happen. If you are an innocent person, you wouldn't care so strongly about the mistakes IF they ever did happen.

This is so wrong, it hurts. If you are spied on, you would never know about it, because the court proceedings are secret. Since you cannot know that you, personally, have been spied on, you have no legal standing to sue. Others have tried -- http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_t..._have_standing_to_challenge_surveillance.html

None of this is about the shooter's rights. Period. Stop trying to make it appear that way. You argue that accessing this phone (which might not even contain any valuable information) is worth subverting the digital security of millions of users (not to mention damaging the business reputation of one of our most successful companies). Sorry, that's not a good trade at all. Ask yourself, however, why the FBI picked *this case* to sue over, versus the dozen or so other phones they also want unlocked in the same way? It's because they are counting on people to let their desire to catch terrorists cloud their judgement, exactly as you are doing right now. If you want to use 1984 as a fascism how-to guide, move somewhere else.

 

[Rippleman]

This is so wrong, it hurts. If you are spied on, you would never know about it, because the court proceedings are secret. Since you cannot know that you, personally, have been spied on, you have no legal standing to sue. Others have tried -- http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_t..._have_standing_to_challenge_surveillance.html

None of this is about the shooter's rights. Period. Stop trying to make it appear that way. You argue that accessing this phone (which might not even contain any valuable information) is worth subverting the digital security of millions of users (not to mention damaging the business reputation of one of our most successful companies). Sorry, that's not a good trade at all. Ask yourself, however, why the FBI picked *this case* to sue over, versus the dozen or so other phones they also want unlocked in the same way? It's because they are counting on people to let their desire to catch terrorists cloud their judgement, exactly as you are doing right now. If you want to use 1984 as a fascism how-to guide, move somewhere else.

1) wait.. if they didn't know about it, how can they sue? Did you just counter your own argument?
2) IF you are claiming that violating the murderers privacy puts everyone else at risk, then you are also against checking their house? mail? firearm history? travel history ect ect? It's about privacy right?

 

[Burty117]

2) IF you are claiming that violating the murderers privacy puts everyone else at risk, then you are also against checking their house? mail? firearm history? travel history ect ect? It's about privacy right?

Seriously, what is wrong with you? Have you not read a single article (including the one you are commenting on) about this particular case?
He's not claiming violating a single persons (in this case a terrorist) privacy would put everyone else at risk.

The entire debate is over the fact the FBI want a back door to all iOS devices, they don't want Apple to just unlock this single phone. Why would they? They have the technical ability to do that already. They want it to be much easier to access everyone's iOS devices, this means creating a back door on all iOS devices which anyone could exploit.It also sets a legal precedence so the government can ask for the same of Google, Microsoft etc...

If you truly do not understand that, I don't know what else to say...