Apple opposes gov order to unlock iPhone

[Benton]

(02-17-2016, 04:02 PM)Au165 Wrote: Once again, you don't understand how full disk works. It is taking a safe that is unpick able, and letting someone else set the combination. The manufacture of the safe can't get in to it, that is the point of coming up with these super high end security features.

The second point has no impact on what I am saying, OnStar tracking you is not the same as forcing a company to add a backdoor into a secure product. It is a completely irrelevant comparison.

This last point is false, and actually shows a complete ignorance on the subject.

To the bold, I've already said I disagree with forcing a company to create one. Where we disagree, I think, and where I'm leaving it, is that I think Apple already has that ability, they just don't want that out there.

[Benton]

(02-17-2016, 04:09 PM)Au165 Wrote: That would be true if the law change, as it stands there is nothing illegal about encryption and they were promised full encryption. To surrender the key without a very strong legal opposition to it would be failing to deliver upon the marketed feature. One of the reasons I don't think the order will stand is this very argument, encryption isn't illegal and to provide a back door would be counter intuitive to the thing they are selling. Make it illegal or deal with it.

You can not be sued for following a court order. No court is going to touch that lawsuit.

[Au165]

(02-17-2016, 04:17 PM)Benton Wrote: You can not be sued for following a court order. No court is going to touch that lawsuit.

That goes back to the starting point....the order won't stand because it causes undue harm to the company and it's customers. See it's round and round.

[Au165]

(02-17-2016, 04:15 PM)Benton Wrote: Where we disagree, I think, and where I'm leaving it, is that I think Apple already has that ability, they just don't want that out there.

Not many times you get to say this in a debate forum, but....You are wrong. If you understood the technology, you would understand how. We can leave it here, but there is in fact no way to get into the iPhone without the password.

[Au165]

As a side note, two states (NY,CA) are trying to introduce legislation to make full disk encryption illegal. I once again think this is a bad idea.

[fredtoast]

(02-17-2016, 04:20 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not many times you get to say this in a debate forum, but....You are wrong. If you understood the technology, you would understand how. We can leave it here, but there is in fact no way to get into the iPhone without the password.

Actually we have no idea how hard it would be.  But the law currently does not hold Apple responsible to provide it no matter how easy it would be.

[Au165]

(02-17-2016, 04:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually we have no idea how hard it would be.  But the law currently does not hold Apple responsible to provide it no matter how easy it would be.

Actually we do know how hard it is, it is impossible based on how they have built the system. If they could do it it would have already been done in the last two months by the intelligence community. All of the intelligence community uses full disk encryption devices for this very reason. I get that people in general struggle with the idea of something actually being impossible to do, but that is the whole point of these systems.

[fredtoast]

(02-17-2016, 05:33 PM)Au165 Wrote: Actually we do know how hard it is, it is impossible based on how they have built the system.

No one knows how hard it is to break the program because no one knows exactly how it is designed except Apple.  If it was so obvious that it was impossible then the government would not bother going to court over it.

But to me that is not even an issue.  It doesn't matter how easy it would be.

[Benton]

(02-17-2016, 05:33 PM)Au165 Wrote: Actually we do know how hard it is, it is impossible based on how they have built the system. If they could do it it would have already been done in the last two months by the intelligence community. All of the intelligence community uses full disk encryption devices for this very reason. I get that people in general struggle with the idea of something actually being impossible to do, but that is the whole point of these systems.

well, I said I was going to leave it alone.



anyway, if it's impossible apple would've said "it's impossible." They haven't. They've said 'we don't want to.' You keep saying it's not possible, but apple is saying otherwise. I believe them.

[Mike M (the other one)]

I guess that's why the FBI is requesting another $38 mil to be added to their budget this year to try and help them bust those pesky encryptions.

[Au165]

(02-17-2016, 05:46 PM)Benton Wrote: well, I said I was going to leave it alone.



anyway, if it's impossible apple would've said "it's impossible." They haven't. They've said 'we don't want to.' You keep saying it's not possible, but apple is saying otherwise. I believe them.

There was an assumption based on apples own notes about their secure enclave in their security statment, but it is coming out now that may have been false. It was believed the secure enclave acted as a safe within a safe that was untouchable from the outside. Basically creating the 2 key nuke scenario that made it impossible to hack even for them. It has been leaked by a former engineer that you can touch the firmware on the secure enclave as well as the iOS. This means that a code rewrite would allow the FBI to try and brute force. The issue is depending on how much they can change, the FBI still may be limited to how fast it can brute force. If the guys used a 10 character password or more though, you COULD be talking years to break the code.

If this all ends up being true then in future, the secure enclave operation system needs to be hard coded in order to make the device truly un-hackable even by Apple. To me the most damning thing is that Apple either didn't consider this back door or they knew and they lied to their customers. Both of these scenarios are a bit scary when you consider many high ranking and government officials use these devices with national security level secrets on them.

[*bfine32*]

I'd like to call someone wrong in this thread, but this discussion is well above my knowledge of technology.

But the question is: What good is encrypting something if nobody has the ability to decrypt it?

[GMDino]

(02-18-2016, 11:49 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd like to call someone wrong in this thread, but this discussion is well above my knowledge of technology.

But the question is: What good is encrypting something if nobody has the ability to decrypt it?

I'm with you on the technology.

I can't believe they have no way of getting in themselves...or that they don't want to.

If there is a lock there is a key.

Another thing:  We are all so worried about the government spying on us...but they can't get into our phones?

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2016, 11:52 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm with you on the technology.

I can't believe they have no way of getting in themselves...or that they don't want to.

If there is a lock there is a key.

Another thing:  We are all so worried about the government spying on us...but they can't get into our phones?

I mean I am no Hillary Clinton, but I do have experience with encrypted messages. If you do not have the key you cannot read the message. I have no idea the usefulness behind a message the NOBODY can read.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2016, 11:58 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I mean I am no Hillary Clinton, but I do have experience with encrypted messages. If you do not have the key you cannot read the message. I have no idea the usefulness behind a message the NOBODY can read.

It might be as simple as they COULD see them with the password but they don't have that.

[Benton]

(02-18-2016, 11:49 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd like to call someone wrong in this thread, but this discussion is well above my knowledge of technology.

But the question is: What good is encrypting something if nobody has the ability to decrypt it?

That's the point for keeping it safe. If you've got your credit numbers, phone numbers, naked pics you took that time you had too much tequila — all that stuff is in there safe and sound as long as the system can't be broken into. It's all encrypted. And with an Apple, it can be set where if you enter the wrong passcode enough times, it deletes all the data. Which is good if you don't want your info getting out.

Decrypting it requires the password or guessing the password. That opens the phone and allows the data to be used. Computers can enter random passwords trying to open the phone, but the Feds fear after 10 it will wipe the data.

This debate is whether or not Apple can and should remove that 10 entry wall. As I've said, I personally think they already can. That's just opinion.

[Bmoreblitz]

The FBI wants Apple to allow them to go through "the back door" and search phones of suspected terrorists. Apple said that the ability will allow hackers to also do the same thing.
There are compelling arguments on both sides. This is a tough one.
they want to establish a legal precedent!

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2016, 12:08 PM)Benton Wrote: That's the point for keeping it safe. If you've got your credit numbers, phone numbers, naked pics you took that time you had too much tequila — all that stuff is in there safe and sound as long as the system can't be broken into. It's all encrypted. And with an Apple, it can be set where if you enter the wrong passcode enough times, it deletes all the data. Which is good if you don't want your info getting out.

Decrypting it requires the password or guessing the password. That opens the phone and allows the data to be used. Computers can enter random passwords trying to open the phone, but the Feds fear after 10 it will wipe the data.

This debate is whether or not Apple can and should remove that 10 entry wall. As I've said, I personally think they already can. That's just opinion.

As I said: This is one of the FEW things that is above my level of expertise. I once had a program that didn't work (my technical term for it) and the developers told me it was like I had a key, but no car; no idea what they meant.

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2016, 12:17 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: The FBI wants Apple to allow them to go through "the back door" and search phones of suspected terrorists. Apple said that the ability will allow hackers to also do the same thing.
There are compelling arguments on both sides. This is a tough one.
they want to establish a legal precedent!

I don't think that is acurate. They want to go through 1 phone of a known terrorist.

IMO, (given my lack of knowledge) it seems they should be able to give this phone to apple, with a warrant, and say open it. I don't need to know how you do it, just do it.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2016, 12:17 PM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: The FBI wants Apple to allow them to go through "the back door" and search phones of suspected terrorists. Apple said that the ability will allow hackers to also do the same thing.
There are compelling arguments on both sides. This is a tough one.
they want to establish a legal precedent!

That was the impression I was getting from the news reports yesterday on the radio.  Local police would like the precedent also.