Murph Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 You may have heard, the FBI has been unable to hack into Farook Jihad Upchuck's iPhone. They want Apple to do it for them. Apple says NO. Once they create a back door, there's a back door for YOU. There is no more privacy for YOUR information, you might as well have an android. I buy Apple products BECAUSE of the security, and believe Benjamin Franklin. If you give up Liberty for Security, you will have neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 Dam, I made this a poll, but it didn't take...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturn Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I'm with you Murph. As dangerous as some of our enemies can be, I worry more about power hungry politicians and tyrannical bureaucrats having a license to spy and torture at will. All done under the banner of protecting freedom of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevDavidLee Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I have mixed feelings on this issue. I have an Apple IPhone & appreciate the level of security however if I kill a bunch of innocent people I expect my privacy to be violated. I'm thinking Apple could help out in this case without revealing to the FBI or anyone else how to hack their phones and just share the information they find on that phone (i.e. who this guy was talking to). While the FBI currently cannot hack this product it's only a matter of time before they or some other independent hacker can. I understand Apple's concern but if it turns out that other innocent people get killed by people these terrorists were in contact with - I believe there will be a much different outcome of this debate. As an Apple product consumer - that's just my .02 cents worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayinLA Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I carry my phone down my plumbers asscrack just to confuse the FBI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I have mixed feelings on this issue. I have an Apple IPhone & appreciate the level of security however if I kill a bunch of innocent people I expect my privacy to be violated. I'm thinking Apple could help out in this case without revealing to the FBI or anyone else how to hack their phones and just share the information they find on that phone (i.e. who this guy was talking to). While the FBI currently cannot hack this product it's only a matter of time before they or some other independent hacker can. I understand Apple's concern but if it turns out that other innocent people get killed by people these terrorists were in contact with - I believe there will be a much different outcome of this debate. As an Apple product consumer - that's just my .02 cents worth. I'm in agreement with that. In any case, if the FBI or anyone else wants to check my phone activity & content, they are welcome to. It's likely to be: 'Collect you at 1.45' 'I'll be in at 19.00' 'Pay the gas bill' They'll be asleep in 5 minutes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I don't see any conflict here. FBI ask for Apples help. How is that an invasion of privacy, or a threat to any of our privacy? What concerns me, is that Apple feels for some reason, they have a need to not contribute, or even defy a court order in an investigation of terrorist. Obstruction of justice is a crime. Obstruction of an investigation of those carrying attacks against the USA is treason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I don't know all the details under consideration but from what I've heard about it on the news media in the UK it's not simply a case of the FBI asking Apple for help in accessing this one particular 'phone; rather they want a 'back-door' solution which can be used by them to access information from anyone's 'phone anytime they happen to deem it 'necessary'. This, I think, is the sticking-point here and, if so, I'm with Apple. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldog86902 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 It's a crazy work wee live in😜 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 it's not simply a case of the FBI asking Apple for help in accessing this one particular 'phone; rather they want a 'back-door' solution which can be used by them to access information from anyone's 'phone anytime they happen to deem it 'necessary'. This, I think is the sticking-point here and, if so, I'm with Apple. BINGO....... How is it NONE of the American media gets this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I can't think of a better advertising campaign for Apple than a raging debate over breaking into the phone of a guy that we already know did something bad and there can't be any jaw-dropping iconic bombs on that phone. Where were these geniuses we spend a few trillion a year on the week before this guy did this? rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I don't know all the details under consideration but from what I've heard about it on the news media in the UK it's not simply a case of the FBI asking Apple for help in accessing this one particular 'phone; rather they want a 'back-door' solution which can be used by them to access information from anyone's 'phone anytime they happen to deem it 'necessary'. This, I think, is the sticking-point here and, if so, I'm with Apple. Pip. BINGO....... How is it NONE of the American media gets this? I missed that part of it when I wrote my post...guess that's what I get for getting my "news" from Facebook. So, I might ask the question, is that what APPLE says, or is it somewhere in between? Either way, still, I think, if Apple has built a phone so secure that a terrorist, ISIS, or Al Queda can use that is so secure no one can ever access it, they need to undo it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pesh Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I too am in conflict over this. I whole-heartedly approve the Apple stance that they should not allow this kind of access to happen, because if they do it once; what is to stop the FBI from making it general practise? It's the big brother argument again, and no-one should have the privacy of their private phone invaded. As a flip side; it is my belief that anyone that commits murder or terrorism in such heinous ways is effectively waiving their human rights. It might sound barbaric, but it they want to slaughter people like animals, they should in turn have the rights of animals. No lawyers, no protection, no tax-funded treatments, no privacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I don't know all the details under consideration but from what I've heard about it on the news media in the UK it's not simply a case of the FBI asking Apple for help in accessing this one particular 'phone; rather they want a 'back-door' solution which can be used by them to access information from anyone's 'phone anytime they happen to deem it 'necessary'. This, I think, is the sticking-point here and, if so, I'm with Apple. Pip. Exactly. It's not an argument whether the FBI has the right to access the phone's contents; it's an argument on *how* they access that content. I want the FBI to break into this phone, but if it means Apple surrenders its backdoor technology to the FBI, then sorry. The answer is no. It may be the case that even Apple cannot break into this phone. I don't know. What I hope the final ruling is, is that Apple will access the phone on their terms and turn over the contents to the FBI. We've had enough erosion of the 4th amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 ...So, I might ask the question, is that what APPLE says, or is it somewhere in between?... It was the former. There was an interview with a legal representative for Apple on the BBC's main evening news last night. The original question as put to her wasn't part of the broadcast but the discussion leading up to her statement had been central to the 'back-door' idea being given over to the FBI as a matter of general policy and it was this particular aspect of the ruling with which she was in disagreement - not the accessing of the individual 'phone at the centre of the furore. Pip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 When the next terror attack takes place, and it will, the first question will be 'why didn't law enforcement prevent this?"Simple, because we the people are not in it to win it. The phone in question is passcode protected with a program that will erase all data on stored if more than a set number of failed passcode entries are made. There is little doubt the two in San Bernadino had aid from someone, they were receiving large amounts of money leading up to the attack, as were members of their family. They had explosives which thankfully failed to detonate.If there is any connection to a support system however small it maybe on that device, the FBI must retrieve it. The mission is to catch everyone involved. Throughout our history there have been dark times when the public had to make sacrifices to fight enemies of our common good. This will be the test of our society, will we the people put ourselves before our nation? Will we ever see another time where the nation as a whole came together to defeat evil as in WWII? That is what is at stake, a global cabal of hate dedicated to destroying civilized principles that have given us the life we treasure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoonful Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 This is a slippery slope for anyone trying to protect their customers. I'm sure that Apple wants to do the right thing, but the question is how do they protect their customers while not devulging any more information than necessary. I'm guessing that is a one size fits all solution. Its not like there is one solution just for the bad guys and a different solution for everyone else. It is even possible that they may not have a way to secure this information. Ideally, that would be the best way to protect the information from ever being used by anyone. Chances are, though, that Apple does have a way to get at this information, but they may not have it readily accessible or at least have it limited to a very few select individuals. Heck, it may be a computer generated formula that no one ever really sees unless it is stored in a safe somewhere as a last resort. And if there really is an easy way to make this available, I'm guessing that its just a matter of time before a lot of others figure out how to unlock the keys to the door, so to speak. When that happens, no one's private information is safe anymore. It could very well be that once Apple uses the "in case of an emergency, break glass" option, there is no way of going back. From the FBI perspective, they may be thinking that this is a reasonable request for all the right reasons, but, like so many other things, it may not be reasonable at all. And how is Apple supposed to protect its customers and employees once the cat is out of the bag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveFord Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 With this War On Terror thing, we really are at war. They just don't have uniforms on most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeman Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 The phone in question is passcode protected with a program that will erase all data on stored if more than a set number of failed passcode entries are made. Phht lame terrorosts wiping data... My Motorola phone self destructs after 5 failed passcode entries! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBRUCE Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 I'm in agreement with that. In any case, if the FBI or anyone else wants to check my phone activity & content, they are welcome to. It's likely to be: 'Collect you at 1.45' 'I'll be in at 19.00' 'Pay the gas bill' They'll be asleep in 5 minutes A couple of points seem to be missing from the news reports in the last few days on this issue. First, the iphone in question is not owned by Johnny Faroook or his wife. The FBI apparently found their cellphones totally destroyed in their Apt. along with the remains of a Laptop that was missing it's hard drive. The iphone in question belongs to the city of San Bernadino, the folks Johnny worked for. It was his work phone. Seems to me that since they destroyed their personal cellphones and lap top, that if there was anything on the work phone, they would have destroyed it too. Me thinks maybe the Gov. see's this as an opportunity to order Joe Privatebusiness to do the Gov's bidding. This folks, smells like the road to Socialism ! Nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBRUCE Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not intended by the Founding Fathers, to be protection from foreign invasion or overseas interests. They were intended to be protection from OUR OWN GOV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 I look at it like this. Law enforcement always wants to know everybody's business. They're like "What do you have to hide?" I'm like "Everything that's none of your business." They'd want to search my septic tank every day if they thought they could catch me doing something wrong. It's way above my pay grade to know where the line is between what is and isn't their business in this matter, but I don't trust law enforcement to protect my rights. Their job is to step on my rights a little if they can get away with it. Me and Apple's jobs are to protect my rights. I say Apple's doing the right thing. The cops are big boys. They don't even know what they don't even know. But if they took me downtown and plied me with a couple of donuts I'd spill the beans. "I swear it wasn't me. It was Louie Two Fingers." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 There are so many angles to this, it really is hard to expect everyone to know what is "right" in this matter. I don't know if the "right to privacy" is about having the right to have a phone no one can hack, but rather, about the actions of law enforcement and govment. Personally, I don't expect an un-hackable phone as a God given right, but I expect the Constitution to protect me from PEOPLE making efforts to hack my phone. From both angles, we shouldn't have to rely on technology or ability to have our rights protected. If we do, the law isn't working. It's not, and shouldn't be an excuse for the actions of people/gov to look at technology and who has rights or doesn't based on what technology or ability they may have or be able to obtain. So I guess my argument, is if we look at this as Apple protecting our rights, or look at it as having the right to have stuff the Gov can't hack, we have already lost. We SHOULD be able to freely carry a phone knowing the Gov can hack it, and feel safe it about it because we HAVE rights and have law, not technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCowboy Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 BINGO....... How is it NONE of the American media gets this? Because of my tinfoil hat which also repels the CIA, but not the IRS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxson50 Posted February 20, 2016 Share Posted February 20, 2016 This is not only an American problem, the terrorist that attacked the Paris nightclub used the same encryption program National Security Agency director Michael Rogers was quoted in a Yahoo News report Wednesday as confirming speculation about the use of encryption in the November massacre on the streets of Paris by supporters of the Islamic State organization that killed 130. Rogers told Yahoo that "some of the communications" of the Paris attackers "were encrypted," preventing intelligence officials from picking up the trail. As a result, he was quoted as saying, "we did not generate the insights ahead of time. Clearly, had we known, Paris would not have happened." Rogers, who made the comments last week, has joined US law enforcement officials in warning about the dangers of new encrypted devices that make it difficult if not impossible to tap, even with a warrant. The report comes as Apple has challenged a US court order to provide assistance to the FBI to crack an iPhone used in attacks in San Bernardino, California, opening a new front in the encryption debate. http://www.thelocal.fr/20160218/encrypted-messages-allowed-paris-attacks-to-escape-detection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.