Apple and the FBI

Apple refuses to acknowledge the “security sweep” China did on all iPhones in 2015.
Only speculation surrounds exactly what Apple allowed China to do or access.
But Apple isn’t talking about it. Obviously China isn’t talking about it.
China is a totalitarian regime that has a government based on Maoist/Stalinist principles.
Of course we must also look at the trade laws in China that stipulate that any products wishing to be sold in China
must have all the technology divulged to the govt.
It’s highly probable that Apple is only fighting for the right to appear “unhackable” at this point.

The level of sheer bullshit in this thread is incredible, and it is all coming from Vyazma and Stardusty Psyche. They have gone from the statement that CEOs are obligated to maximize shareholder profits to concluding that therefore every decision Tim Cook makes is driven by profit. Then they stepped deeper into their steaming pile of unsubstantiated assertions and told us Apple is siding with terrorist organizations. Now Vy says I can only know Tim Cook’s motives if I am a “close personal friend*” of Cook, yet Vy is judging Cook’s actions. Different standards for different folks.
The only evidence of Cook’s motives I have seen is in the letter he sent to Apple customers in mid February, which ends with this.

Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government. We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications. While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect. Tim Cook
The full letter is here: https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
The only evidence of Cook's motives I have sen is in the letter he sent to Apple customers in mid February, which ends with this.
Oh. Well if I had only seen this earlier.... a letter to customers from the CEO. That settles that then. :roll:
C'mon Vy, it's pretty easy to discern an individual's inner thoughts just by tracking their emails, text messages, sites they visit, videos they order, commercials they watch, organizations they are members of, educational background, race and ethnicity, friends they hang out with, word patterns they use on social media, tax returns, books we purchase, how we vote, etc. etc. ad infinitum. Our lives are already an open book for any agency to pry into if they wanted to do so why give them even more information? Hell, we passed 1984 thirty two years ago. I imagine the only stumbling block the NSA has is maintaining 320,000,000 dossiers. It's a bit frightening in the extreme but now it's well nigh impossible for someone to disappear from the radar. Cap't Jack
Most of this validates my points VA. We passed 1984 some time ago. Everything seems to be normal to me. Last time I checked people weren't being rounded up and put in camps because they are on the Barnes and Noble customer appreciation club. Now you tell me, if the government can track phone calls to and from terrorists should they be able to act on that? If a person tries to buy large quantities of bomb making materials should the government be able to investigate that? If someone is making Facebook posts about shooting up a kindergarten classroom should they be able to investigate that? Would that be too 1984ish for you?
Our lives are already an open book for any agency to pry into if they wanted to do so why give them even more information? Cap't Jack
Nobody pries into anybody's life. Who is "they"? You see things in terms of dossiers? When a proper, legal warrant is issued, people will give any and all information the government requests. Or are you against the Constitution? 4th Ammend. It's really that simple.
Thevillageatheist ..tracking their emails, text messages, sites they visit, videos they order, commercials they watch, organizations they are members of, educational background, race and ethnicity, friends they hang out with, word patterns they use on social media, tax returns, books we purchase, how we vote, etc. etc.
Yes, exactly the kind of information I want the FBI to have about the San Bernardino Islamist jihadist shooters, hence my disgust with Apple for their obstruction of justice and obstinate protection of individuals who killed Americans on behalf of a state that has declared war on the USA, the Islamic State.
Our lives are already an open book for any agency to pry into if they wanted to do so why give them even more information?
You are arguing against yourself. The government has traditionally been able to search criminal records, yet you do not want them to have that ability. No, I do not want a world where gangsters and jihadists can operate with impunity against law enforcement monitoring. Traditionally law enforcement has always had the capability to monitor and search, yet no jack booted thugs have broken down my door for watching Asian ass porn (actually that is Tosh.O, but you get my drift).
Hell, we passed 1984 thirty two years ago
Yes, it came and went without fanfare like all the other doomsday predictions before and since. I am not obsessed with a paranoia about some kabal or parallel government or some distopian nightmare usurpation of our constitutional democratic republic or any other such conspiracy fear mongering. I am concerned about the very real threat of Islamist jihad obtaining WMD. Right now IS is weak. We could crush them like a snail under our boot but that would cost a lot of innocent lives and money, generate a lot of backlash, and likely lead to more jihad in a sort of Muhammad psychosis whack a mole game. Also, a few jihadists with some rifles will not bring down the USA or even make a statistically significant blip on the mortality graph. But the Islamic State is just that, Islamic and a State. They have declared war on the USA and they have attacked the USA. Worst of all, WMD is not a secret. Any state that wants to can generate them unless we very forcefully prevent them from developing that capability. Once WMD are developed MAD will not be effective against a group with an apocalyptic vision to battle at Dabiq Their cry is "bring it on" and "show us no respite". They want this fight to the death because in their twisted minds it is the path to Allah. Here you can listen to the inspiration for the San Bernardino shooters. http://heavy.com/news/2015/11/new-isis-islamic-state-news-pictures-videos-no-respite-english-language-propaganda-full-uncensored-youtube-daesh/
Yes, it came and went without fanfare like all the other doomsday predictions before and since. I am not obsessed with a paranoia about some kabal or parallel government or some distopian nightmare usurpation of our constitutional democratic republic or any other such conspiracy fear mongering.
This really is the crux of the issue right here. A new national idea that the government is out to get people. The people are the government in the US. So what's really tearing the government apart? The people apart? These wing-nut conspiracies and ideas that The Constitution only applies when it backs up certain ideologies. I also think there is a fair amount of brainwashing going on here. Corporate Marketing Model brainwashing. Darron and Macgeyver are a perfect example of this. Somehow corporations are above the law....CEOs are becoming "leaders" to these Branded shills walking around decrying that the sky is falling.
They could tell the US Government that if they are required to divulge their encryption, that they will immediately move all Apple operations and jobs to Canada,
As long as we are issuing threats maybe the USA could then threaten to cut Apple off from the US market for (then) importing tools to be used by criminals and international jihadists to obstruct justice by thwarting a legally obtained court order to conduct a search. It isn't a search. They want to force Apple to create a back door to their seurity system--an unprecedented move. A search warrant rwquires a documented suspiion that a law has been broken and it must show exactly what they are looking for. Fishing expeditions are not allowed. How would you feel of the FBI or any investigatory body insisted on searching your home, car or business with no indication that you had done nothing wrong and with no indication of what they are looking for? Access to that phone is a national security need. That has not been established. The FBI has only claimed it with no evidence to back it up. Hopefully, the FBI will prevail legally and if not, then hopefully our experts at the NSA will succeed in hacking that phone with an invasive attack. You have no understanding of the US Constitution and you are ready to trash it. Amendment IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. More details here: https://richarddawkins.net/2016/02/us-fight-over-gunmans-locked-iphone-could-have-big-impact/#li-comment-198634
The only evidence of Cook's motives I have seen is in the letter he sent to Apple customers in mid February, which ends with this.
Oh. Well if I had only seen this earlier.... a letter to customers from the CEO. That settles that then. :roll: That is the only piece of evidence we have. All you have is an assertion based on flawed logic. You hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself.
That is the only piece of evidence we have. All you have is an assertion based on flawed logic. You hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself.
No we have plenty of other evidence Darron. Cook is a CEO and he is not cooperating(right now)with the FBI. He cooperated with the Chinese Government as well...so apparently he has double standards. There's lot's of evidence. Tim Cook chairs shareholder's meetings. You should study what "evidence" means Darron. That letter Tim sent you is all the evidence you have. Don't confuse your world with reality.

Actually if Tim Cook plays his cards right with the govt. he can conceal the fact that he probably already cooperated with the govt.
Maybe that was the deal. He gives the backdoor, the government makes it look like Apple is a fighter and doesn’t reveal it.
It’s a win-win. For Apple and the Govt.
And you get to keep on thinking your phone is secure from secret bogeymen.

LoisL
It seems you did not read the link I provided. That's OK, just because there is a link does not mean you must read it, but I anticipated all your comments and addressed them here: https://richarddawkins.net/2016/02/us-fight-over-gunmans-locked-iphone-could-have-big-impact/#li-comment-198634 I quoted the 4th Amendment and examined it in detail.
You have no understanding of the US Constitution and you are ready to trash it.
So, you are mistaken on both counts.
It isn’t a search.
Of course it is. What are you even trying to say? Reading the contents of a criminal's phone is a search. Law 101.
They want to force Apple to create a back door to their seurity system
That is the methodology of the search.
—an unprecedented move
Wrong. The telecommunication giants, search engines, ISPs, phone manufacturers and tech companies have been cooperating with law enforcement for decades. Apple is taking the disgusting step of breaking with that history of cooperation and siding with the Islamists.
A search warrant rwquires a documented suspiion that a law has been broken
Were you asleep the last few months? They murdered 14 people in the name of Allah and in fealty with the Islamic State, a state that has declared war on the USA. How much "documented suspicion" do you need?
must show exactly what they are looking for
Uhm, the FBI is looking for contact names, emails, text messages, photos, plans for plots, and all the sorts of things that are useful against Islamic jihadists. How is that not obvious?
How would you feel of the FBI or any investigatory body insisted on searching your home
I did not shoot 36 people, killing 14. How is it that so many people conflate the rights of ordinary citizens with those of suicidal jihadist mass murderers? The FBI wants to search the phone of mass murderers and you are somehow taking that as an affront to civil liberties. I support law enforcement. Yes, there have been bad cops, and abuses. There always have been in every system in every nation and there always will be. That is a flaw of human nature we can only reduce through training and oversight, but never fully eliminate in any large organization. Still, US law enforcement and security services have done a great job of keeping us safe, having foiled plot after plot after plot. But, unfortunetly, even our fine security forces are able to prevent every attack, such as San Bernardino. Once an attack occurs I support law enforcement efforts to fully investigate the contacts of the perpetrators. I want the FBI to gather all the information it can on those Islamist shooters. Here is where you can read all about the wonderful vision of the fundamentalist Islamists http://www.clarionproject.org/news/islamic-state-isis-isil-propaganda-magazine-dabiq I really do urge you to read Dabiq, if you have not yet done so, this from page 3 of issue 13 (their latest) Such was the case on the 20th of Safar when Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik carried out an attack on the kuffr in San Bernardino, California and succeeded in killing 14 of them and wounding 22 more. As the operation took place, Tashfeen Malik made a post online reaffirming their bay’ah to Amīrul- Mu’minīn, Shaykh Abū Bakr al-Baghddī (hafidhahullh). She and her husband then engaged in a shootout with security forces and were killed, thereby attaining shahdah in the path of Allah. We consider them so, and Allah is their judge. Thus, the Khilfah’s call for the Muslims to strike the crusaders in their own lands was answered once more, but on this particular occasion the attack was unique. The mujhid involved did not suffice with embarking upon the noble path of jihd alone. Rather, he conducted the operation together with his wife, with the two thereby aiding one another in righteousness and taqw.

I suggest that skeptics of Apple’s stance to not break their own security software check this out:

In a nutshell, for purely technical reasons, it is impossible to both make a system secure and create a backdoor, and it’s impossible to create a backdoor that only one entity can access.

Trombone, I have no idea what is and isn’t technically possible.
A you-tube video isn’t going to convince me either.
I’m content to wait and see what the Govt. says is technically feasible.
You want me to post some you tube videos of a guy who says the Moon Landings didn’t take place?
We can do that too. He says the Moon Landings weren’t technically feasible either.

The video uses the analogy of a safe.
Law enforcement can break into any safe. They always have been able to do so. This is not a violation of civil liberties.
The assistance provided by Apple does not need to simply be a simple number that once leaked can then be used by anybody and everybody and now the sky is falling, oh my. Do you really suppose that our security experts in the federal government are so naive and simplistic as all that?
The technical assistance can take the form of details of how to conduct a successful invasive attack. This form of attack requires a great deal of sophisticated equipment and data analysis resources.
In the future the key need not be simply a single number or even a purely software algorithm. It can also take the form of a hardware key wherein not only must a series of numbers be entered correctly but a large number of electrical signals must be employed in just the right time sequence, and applied using internal connections that are only accessible by dismantling the phone and attaching custom designed circuits to the phone. Only by entering a very complicated set of electrical signals in just the right time sequence would the phone be made accessible.
A present day approach is to use an invasive attack to extract the password from the phone itself. Apple might be able to provide advice as to where the password is stored in memory and how it could be extracted from the phone’s memory chips.
Another form of invasive attack is to connect internal traffic monitoring equipment to the phone to monitor the data bus and address bus when entering a password. The incorrect password may be compared to the correct password to gain access. Even though the incorrect password entry will fail, the correct password may be exposed on the internal data pathways during the password entry attempt. Details of the algorithm provided by Apple might permit such an invasive attack.
Another future approach is not to use a single key but a whole series of keys, or even a special key for each phone. Leaking a single number would only unlock the phone or phones assessable by that particular key. To use the key would require the serial number of the phone, the key for that particular phone, plus the sophisticated hardware and software methods needed to use the key.
Yet another approach is to encrypt the key itself with what is known as a key encryption key. In this approach to use the key one would need the encrypted key, the key encryption key, and the algorithm used to perform the encryption of the key.
My friends. our security experts spend their lives studying and working these issues in great detail, making the analysis provided in the above video hopelessly simplistic.
So, no, the sky will not fall if Apple assists the FBI. This is a technical and security problem that can be solved.

Stardusty, thank you for actually watching the video. That guy explained the problems with deliberately breaking a digital security system better than I would. In very general terms, yes, but valid nonetheless.
I assume you watched all of it, so I don’t understand why you listed a bunch of general ways to break encryption without dealing with the “backdoor access for nobody-but-us” problem.

Trombone, I have no idea what is and isn't technically possible. A you-tube video isn't going to convince me either. I'm content to wait and see what the Govt. says is technically feasible.
Or, you could, you know, go and learn something yourself, or maybe not get worked up over a subject you know absolutely nothing about.
Or, you could, you know, go and learn something yourself, or maybe not get worked up over a subject you know absolutely nothing about.
Right Trombone. What do I need to know? Hey Trombone, you should send that video to the FBI. That'll probably settle the issue right? Once the FBI has seen the video they'll probably realize there's nothing they can do.

Vyazma, I’m an engineer, so my approach may not be for you, but I think a good place to start would be to dive into how encryption works, from the theoretical side. You might pick one of a few starting points:
See how research in number theory makes encryption stronger. One of the most basic and most powerful involves, very simply, using a Mersenne Prime search to find extremely large prime numbers.
See how basic logical operations like XOR can act as an effective encrypting method, as long as you control the key.
Look through the history of how people broke codes. Alan Turing’s (and team) breaking the Enigma Machine during WWII is a famous example, but many others abound. One might argue that effective control of information - both yours and your opponents - has been a decisive factor in many, many military conflicts.
Learn how networks work, how protocols control how information travels. The internet is an obvious one here, although it is many networks, not just one. Cellphone networks have similar properties.
I think that the main question here is really how is it possible that Apple can make a security system for everyone’s phone that can resist all of the above-mentioned ways of hacking it, forcing the FBI to ask for help. You doubt that they actually have; I think it’s feasible, otherwise why would the FBI bother to appeal for help? I hope that diving into some of these areas will show you why I think Apple’s alleged security strength is feasible, or at the least give you more tools to show me what a fool I am.

I think that the main question here is really how is it possible that Apple can make a security system for everyone's phone that can resist all of the above-mentioned ways of hacking it, forcing the FBI to ask for help.
Why is that the main question? How is it possible? I don't know...how are CV joints in cars possible? How are milking machines possible? How was the Mars Rover possible?
You doubt that they actually have;
I doubt what? That the FBI has asked for help, or that the phones are practically impervious to hacking? I don't doubt either. This is where you have sidetracked into some unrelated argument I guess.
I think it's feasible, otherwise why would the FBI bother to appeal for help? I hope that diving into some of these areas will show you why I think Apple's alleged security strength is feasible, or at the least give you more tools to show me what a fool I am.
Ok. Am I missing something here? Why are you referring to Apple's security strength as "alleged"? The argument here is that Apple should fully cooperate with the police. It should give the FBI and the police the technological tools to access these phones for search purposes. I don't know what tangent you have gone off into, I could be missing something. I don't know if you can tie it in. Or show some quote of mine above that has led us down this avenue. I may not have been clear enough in my writing.