Apple vs. FBI

[footballfan993]

I'm wondering what are your thoughts on the Apple vs. FBI case, that has popped up in the next this week?

The latest that I have heard is that Apple has shown that the Apple ID of the iPhone owner's device was changed after the FBI was in possession of the iPhone. Apple implies FBI screwup: iPhone Apple ID password changed in govt possession, backdoor unnecessary

My take it that I agree with Apple 100%. I think that if Apple allows the FBI access to the phone, that will be bad for everyone. If Apple allows a "backdoor" for their devices, it will only be a matter of time before the criminals get that info, and start to use it for bad things such as stalking, murder, etc.

Also if you haven't done so already, I strongly urge you to read Tim Cook's open letter response on the Apple website.

I own an iPhone, Apple TV, Macbook, and iPod (which doesn't really get used anymore). Some reasons why I buy Apple products is for the quality of the devices, the resale value, the ease of use, the features, and, as in this case, the security. I also know that a lot of professionals, photographers, graphic designers, movie editors, etc, love working with Apple products.

If Apple builds a "backdoor", which currently doesn't exist, even if it's 'just this once' as the FBI states, we know, that this exists, and if that code falls into the wrong hands that will make every iOS device vulnerable.

This is my opinion, and I would love to hear yours on this matter.

 

[vintagesnaps]

To me this doesn't just involve privacy of law abiding citizens - this was a phone that was not only involved in criminal activity, but a phone used by two terrorists who murdered innocent people. If accessing the phone can assist in doing further investigation that could help prevent future terror attacks then I think it's necessary.

I don't know all the current relevant laws, and there are many uses of technology that are new enough that laws may need to be changed or adapted. Let's not enable terrorists to be able to hide, but figure out how to balance our privacy and the safety of citizens.

 

[vintagesnaps]

And the 9to5 websites are not news sources. I cannot find an address, or the name of anyone... so who owns the sites? is it a registered business in the US?? I can't tell, but I found their advertising info. - and how much they charge advertisers. All their contact info. shows is for site users to send them tips - who's making money from this site??? Seems they want to stay hidden...

 

[Gary A.]

I believe that Apple may have already and secretly provided the government access to the phone. I think this is merely window dressing to show to the public/consumers that Apple has their back. Or window dressing for the government to cover that they broke the code so that other bad guys think that using a cell phone is secure.

 

[KmH]

ThePhotoForum.com FAQ | Photography Forum
* No general politics are allowed. If the political discussion involves photography, it may be allowed.

There is a good chance this thread is going to get the boot.

 

[Trever1t]

No. The government does not have right to order a private enterprise to perform at their whim. That said I sincerely doubt the US Government can't break into a phone? LOL, as already mentioned, it's just a ploy.

 

[footballfan993]

Thanks for the responses. In regards to this being a "political post" I don't think it is such, because this is more of a security post, which I see as perfectly fine, furthermore, there are iPhoneographers, who take amazing pictures with their iPhone, and I also use iCloud Photos, and have all my photos sync across my devices, so this post does in fact pertain to the subject of photography. It might not be in a direct way, but it still pertains to photography.

Plus if you have photos on your device that you took, I know that I wouldn't want the government or criminal access to these photos. or any other data on my device.

9to5Mac is a site that I use and they are an Apple news reporting site, and when appropriate, they do include links in their articles to outside sources. If you would like to get into contact with the authors, Sharon, they do have emails and twitter accounts too.

 

[Derrel]

The risk to world-wide, global security for hundreds of millions of users is at stake here. It is extremely likely that the "authorities" will attempt to reverse engineer whatever break-in method Apple creates--you can BANK on that. Once given the master key to the world, who knows who will use it for ill gotten gains, snooping, thrills, cyber crime, blackmail, and unfair advantage in business, trade, politcs, whatever. NO SECRETS will be safe if Apple caves in to this outlandish demand. Once done, the genie will never go back in the bottle. This will give the "authorities" the ability to snoop through a limitless number of what should be secure encrypted devices. basically, the "authorities" want Apple to give them the technology to break into every encrypted Apple phone in existence. Basically the authorities are demanding the right to be GIVEN unlimited search and seizure power, without warrants, with no reason. The authorities are demanding a world-wide MASTER KEY, under the guise of needing to snoop through the iPhone of a dead woman, who was a member of a one-off, relatively minor shooting episode that was confined to one city. In terms of "terrorism", what they did in San Bernardino, California was minor, compared against even one, single middle east bus incident,etc.. The risks of allowing this to stand are HUGE, and the possible rewards are pathetically small.

 

[Designer]

Back in the days of our Constitution, the government could not force an entity to produce something. Times are different now. The FBI will win, Apple will lose.

 

[Gary A.]

Back in the days of our Constitution, the government could not force an entity to produce something. Times are different now. The FBI will win, Apple will lose.

I agree times are different ... fortunately or unfortunately we act pragmatically without due regard to the long term or principles.

The President and our officers in the Armed Forces, do not pledge to the people or the property of theses united states ... but rather take an oath to defend the Constitution. While people and property are dear and well worth defending ... it is the Constitution which is sacrosanct. It is the ideals contained in the Constitution, above all else, which makes us Americans.

I think it will boil down to a single judge in the Ninth Circuit to determine who will prevail. Fortunately, Apple can afford constitutional attorneys equal to the federal government. The Ninth Circuit tends to side on the liberal side of interpretation, but, I think it's too close to call if the government can make a convincingly strong 'Clear and Present Danger / For the Good of the General Public' argument that can overcome the ton of arguments, constitutional and practical, against Apple creating said application.

I am fascinated by all this, the whole public debate. The local paper is carrying the story on the front pages and the story have been long and detailed.

 

[terri]

It's time to close it - sorry - OR, I can happily move this over to the Subscriber's forum, where it can keep going un-moderated. There are certain key words popping up in here that make it a shoo-in to move from questionably political to overtly political. I'm sorry! Them's the rules.

I'll be happy to move it if anyone wants to PM me.