FBI: Apple's new privacy features protect kidnappers, pedos and terrorists

[GTaudiophile]

Someone call the whhhaaambulence. Someone is pissed (or pretending to be) that he's losing his backdoor access.

To quote a friend of mine...

Amazing they are going this far to try to keep spying on you. As the article points out there is a really simple way to get your phone data: create a compelling case for a judge with evidence that justifies a warrant. It's supposed to be the rule of law, not the rule of spies.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/13/technology/security/fbi-apple/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

[smackababy]

I actually don't think you have to tell, even when ordered. With the right to not self incriminate, if evidence exists on my phone, could I plead the 5th with asked for the password? Has that actually held up in court? Didn't someone claim to have forgotten the password to a laptop and that went to court?

I would love for this forced telling or unlocking of a device to be challenged up the courts.

 

[Kadarin]

The government has only itself to blame here. But even I have to admit that resorting to the old "think of the children!!!" argument is really lame.

 

[Atreus21]

We peons just can't be trusted I guess.

 

[massmedia]

as long as iCloud has a copy and Apple holds the encryption keys...
all the police or Govt need to do is ask politely for a copy ad they'll get it.

false advertising by apple

also, aren't iPhones locked with 4-5 digit pin codes &/or a fingerprint?

• 4-5 digit pin can be brute forced in what... 6 seconds with a decent rig sporting several video cards? Dept of Homeland would gladly spend some taxpayer dollars to provide every dept with just such a computer specially designed to do nothing but crack iPhones.

• last I heard people get fingerprinted when they get arrested. you do the math

in conclusion, this is just theater aimed to make people think that these devices are secure when aren't. nicely played by big bro though.

 

[rommelrommel]

You can turn off simple password on an iPhone and make it as complex as you want.
I don't know exactly how secure the encryption is but I have been hearing that it's not practical to brute force it. Organisations like the NSA can break it but not for every single device and communication as they'd like to.

 

[xaeniac]

as they cry unfair!

 

[The Merg]

I actually don't think you have to tell, even when ordered. With the right to not self incriminate, if evidence exists on my phone, could I plead the 5th with asked for the password? Has that actually held up in court? Didn't someone claim to have forgotten the password to a laptop and that went to court?

I would love for this forced telling or unlocking of a device to be challenged up the courts.

Yeah, I don't think they could force you to give up the passcode. That would be forcing you to incriminate yourself. While some posted here that some judges have done that and have found those that don't comply in contempt, I don't think it would hold up if it was challenged.

The article also makes it sound as if the Government was sneaky about getting data before. Not true. They still needed a search warrant, but submitted it to Apple in order to get the data. The article makes it sound as if the Government needs to serve a search warrant on the phone owner and that would magically get them the passcode. That's not the case.

- Merg

 

[Jaskalas]

I stand for our civil rights, as declared in our Constitution. If the FBI wishes to oppose our rights, then they are no friend of mine.

 

[irishScott]

as long as iCloud has a copy and Apple holds the encryption keys...
all the police or Govt need to do is ask politely for a copy ad they'll get it.

false advertising by apple

also, aren't iPhones locked with 4-5 digit pin codes &/or a fingerprint?

• 4-5 digit pin can be brute forced in what... 6 seconds with a decent rig sporting several video cards? Dept of Homeland would gladly spend some taxpayer dollars to provide every dept with just such a computer specially designed to do nothing but crack iPhones.

• last I heard people get fingerprinted when they get arrested. you do the math

in conclusion, this is just theater aimed to make people think that these devices are secure when aren't. nicely played by big bro though.

No, it's actually not. Neither Apple nor Google (in the case of the Android) have a copy of the key you use for local encryption. So cloud backups are wide open, but anything on your phone is yours and yours alone. The whole idea is to make the rest of the world trust them enough to buy their products. No it won't magically secure your entire digital life, but it's legit for what it is.

As for brute forcing, you can use a longer pin, an alpha-numeric password or set up timed lockouts.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Iv'e little doubt that the nsa can crack w/e encryption scheme Apple comes up with. However, they're bound by the same laws of physics as us, so it's doubtful they could do so on such a large scale, rather, prioritize suspect terrorists instead.

 

[cubby1223]

This really is an interesting situation we have.

The only way this privacy is achievable is by having for-profit corporations be more powerful than the government is

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Yeah, I don't think they could force you to give up the passcode. That would be forcing you to incriminate yourself. While some posted here that some judges have done that and have found those that don't comply in contempt, I don't think it would hold up if it was challenged

The Colorado Bank Fraud Case.

It's definitely still up in the air, with the lower courts making conflicting rulings on the matter.

 

[lopri]

I applaud Apple for this new policy. I hope other manufacturers follow suit.

P.S. Those who are sensitive about privacy should avoid using fingerprint scanner.

 

[The Merg]

I applaud Apple for this new policy. I hope other manufacturers follow suit.

P.S. Those who are sensitive about privacy should avoid using fingerprint scanner.

It's not a policy by Apple. It's just a result of the enhanced security that the phones have with iOS 8.

- Merg

 

[z1ggy]

FBI acts like 50% of the people out there are criminals, etc. No way you should be infringing on the rights of 99% of the population just to have a crack at the other 1%.

 

[master_shake_]

oh noes the fbi has to do real police work now instead of having things handed to them on a silver platter?!??!?

poor things....

 

[cubby1223]

oh noes the fbi has to do real police work now instead of having things handed to them on a silver platter?!??!?

poor things....

I don't think that is the best way to state it. The harder their job is, the more of my tax dollars it takes for them to accomplish the task. I want them to be efficient so I can keep more of my money.

 

[PokerGuy]

When "think of the children!" is invoked, you know their argument is pathetically lame and can't be supported logically.

 

[master_shake_]

I don't think that is the best way to state it. The harder their job is, the more of my tax dollars it takes for them to accomplish the task. I want them to be efficient so I can keep more of my money.

so no one ever anywhere should have privacy ever...

nope that's not how it works.

 

[inachu]

it also keeps out your mom and dad and the police and nosy neighbors and internet creeps including stalkers.


Seriously this keeps more bad people out than it does protect bad people.

Also big gov if they had a choice would force all people to live in a glass house.

 

[massmedia]

for the average jane/john doe, what percentage are likely to enable a lockout longer than the standard 4 or 5 digit pincode... i'm guessing not many. shouldn't that make brute forcing the password an easy task for all phones with such short pincodes?

i'd also expect thee to be some sort of way to clone the entire phone into a virtual device sitting on a forensic examiner's harddrive. encrypted phones may create the incentive for a tech company to create just such software and market it to big bro.

anyway you slice it, i think it is highly unethical to suggest to anyone that mobile phones are secure devices.

 

[massmedia]

Also big gov if they had a choice would force all people to live in a glass house.

what... you don't want to live in a glass house? you must either be a criminal or a subersive bad guy

 

[Pipeline 1010]

I don't think that is the best way to state it. The harder their job is, the more of my tax dollars it takes for them to accomplish the task. I want them to be efficient so I can keep more of my money.

Yes, please let them violate civil rights so that I can keep more of my money. Cop Logic®

 

[irishScott]

for the average jane/john doe, what percentage are likely to enable a lockout longer than the standard 4 or 5 digit pincode... i'm guessing not many. shouldn't that make brute forcing the password an easy task for all phones with such short pincodes?

i'd also expect thee to be some sort of way to clone the entire phone into a virtual device sitting on a forensic examiner's harddrive. encrypted phones may create the incentive for a tech company to create just such software and market it to big bro.

anyway you slice it, i think it is highly unethical to suggest to anyone that mobile phones are secure devices.

Well then that's the fault of the user. Enabling a longer password is pretty simple:
http://www.androidcentral.com/password-protect-your-phone
http://www.imore.com/how-to-secure-iphone-ipad-strong-alphanumeric-password

Even if they can image it, good luck cracking even an 8 character password in a decent period of time. Of course mobile phones still aren't completely secure, aside from using encrypted communications like Silent Circle for everything and installing a very limited selection of apps there's no way they can be (security through obscurity notwithstanding). But default local encryption is a big step forward. Even with Moore's Law it's still relatively easy to create a password that will outlast the statute of limitations ona given crime.