02.20.2016 10:58 AM

I thought the NSA had all of my private stuff already

9 Comments

  1. harvey bushell says:

    For profit or not at least they’re concerned about it. Don’t forget that the US is only a single market of all worldwide smartphone/iphone sales so if Apple or other cell phone manuf’s cave to the FBI and give them a backdoor method to bypass encryption then well over half of their global sales market will be more than just a little pissed because it will expose them to the same lack of privacy and security.

    At that point I believe you’d see small market players not beholding to the FBI or US law in China, India and other countries suddenly leap forward and grab a huge chunk of sales from the current major players. They’ll do (or not do) whatever is is necessary to prevent that from ever happening.

  2. lou says:

    I have never understood the fake outrage when a government attempts to alter privacy rights that most have given freely to Facebook and Apple for the “right” to use their services. People need to understand that they collect every tiny bit of information about what you like and who you are and then use that information or in an indirect manner, sell it. Says more about us than them. I own no Apple products and never will.

  3. Jeff says:

    All-seeing all-knowing God is also privy to your deepest darkest secrets…. believe it.

  4. Jack D says:

    That is so true.

    Neither of these entities give a shit about consumer privacy in reality. But I’d argue that both of them DO make a profit. Apple, for instance, sells meta-data or uses it to target market demographics through advertising without a proper process by which the consumer is aware of the implicit consent they provide Apple with through purchases. The FBI, on the other hand, use meta-data for “security purposes” that in actuality achieves nothing in the way of protecting the public. It simply mines data without the consent and knowledge of citizens to then turn around and demand more resources from governments to mine even more.

    So both do benefit monetarily from exploiting our personal data.

    That said, I side with Apple in this matter. Context behind this situation shows that:

    a) accessing this iPhone is a pointless endeavour because the perpetrators went to great lengths to dispose of any electronics with anything incriminating on them, so I hardly think they forgot to clear this phone (which happens to be a work phone provided to them by their employer);

    b) any information that could be yielded from this endeavour would be insignificant because the attack has already been proven to be a self-inspired act and would lead to no new informational revelations;

    c) if the FBI really wanted to get into this phone then they would have by now. I find it highly doubtful that the FBI would lack the resources to find themselves a skilled hacker to simply unlock an iPhone;

    d) and, perhaps most importantly, it sets a precedence. If the FBI push Apple into doing this one thing now it will completely compromise the integrity of Apple’s confidentiality agreements with consumers. On the business side of things, this could be very damaging to tech companies like Apple and Google that consider themselves as independent institutions.

    Apple isn’t exactly an exemplary institute for privacy protection, but neither is the FBI. I think security agencies have proven that they are completely failing to adapt modern technological advances and continue to live in the J. Edger Hoover days of public monitoring. As consumers, we already have a fight to take up with Apple for mining our data the way they do –opening the door to the the FBI, CSIS, and etc. only adds to our problems. I do believe that security agencies have a mandate to protect us from harm and should gain access to information pertinent to public safety, but they need to ensure that they aren’t the ones we need to be protected from. The way things are going nowadays, I don’t know if they’re making their case.

  5. davie says:

    For me, privacy laws and regulations have always been used by institutions, private and government, to cover their own butts. I lead a sheltered life, and so I have not seen the laws and regs used on behalf of an individual human being.

  6. Steve T says:

    Totally agree. This has nothing to do with Apple doing what is “right”. It is a cynical ploy because they think this will make them look like a hero. If they believed hacking the phone would be more populist, they would do it in an instant – even if they believed it to be wrong themselves.

  7. Maps Onburt says:

    My natural tendency would be to side with the FBI against terrorism on this one but on sober second thought, I come down firmly on the side of Applr even if they are doing a really shitty job of saying why the FBI should go away.

    It comes down to this:. The second Apple does this for any reason, there will be precedent to rely on to force Apple to do it again. Its a slippery slope and the end result is going to force Apple to keep one set of keys for itself to ensure it can get in when necessary. Every pissant country in the world will try this on for size. Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia all tried this with BlackBerry (unsuccessfully) but if there is precedent they’ll likely be more successful. I don’t believe for one second that they can’t crack a 4 digit passcode if they gave it to their friends at the NsA. Hell even Symantec offered to unlock it for free for them. This is all about setting precedent they can use for other purposes.

  8. Harvey Bushell says:

    Also worth remembering is that TPS, over a year ago, took Sandro Lisi’s confiscated iphone down to Apple HQ in the US to get it decrypted. They made a big deal about it although we don’t know what happened other than a couple of detectives flew down with it and returned. Perhaps we’ll see what the results were if/when there’s a trial.

    Obviously if Apple did it for the Lisi investigation they could have done it, if asked, by the FBI for other investigations as well. The FBI is simply over-reaching because they want the backdoor info to be used in the future wherever and whenever they want, with a warrant or as part of a black-op operation they or the NSA/CIA/etc deem necessary and that means when the fuck ever they feel like it.

  9. Steve T says:

    The “slippery slope” argument is such a first-world problem. We are awfully self-absorbed with the apparent importance of our daily drivel. Do we really believe that government spooks will spy on us and use our inane text messages and Pintarest cat pictures as part of some super-secret plot?

    While we consume ourselves with this idiocy, the bad guys laugh their asses off at us, knowing they are protected. How about next time there is a mass shooting, you send a contrite little email to the victims’ families saying “Gee whiz, we sure would like to catch the perpetrator, but sorry – my self absorption is worth more than other people’s lives.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*