2016 elections - because it's never too early

[11B4V]

I would not be as concerned about this issue, were it not for the fact that the FBI is involved.

Marshals Task Force wanted to get this guy to his front door at zero dark thirty once;  asked the power company to park a couple of trucks in front of his house, make it look like a gas emergency. 
FBI guy showed up when it was all over, but was thoroughly impressed how the Bureau "really made these trucks look real". 

True fucking story.  They're absolute fucking morons.  Seriously.

NCIS is just as bad.

[11B4V]

OvB provides some great specifics on the case.

My objection is more general, and it is that what this is REALLY about is the State being pissed off they cannot snoop somewhere they want to snoop, and they are demanding that Apple provide them a key even when the very basis of the product is designed such that no such key should exist.

This is basically about a lot more than this guys iPhone, which is why the Beebs of the world just LOVE a case like this. This is about a  much more fundamental question.

Does anyone have the right to own something the government *cannot* get at? Is it acceptable to create a product that the Beebs of the world cannot break into no matter how much they REALLY REALLY want to?


Perhaps I am maybe too paranoid, but I am very skeptical of the timing of this. Sure, it is a actual terrorist attack where this issue first comes up, ever? The Feds or state never ever wanted to break into one of these phones before? I suspect this is a golden opportunity for them, a bona fide terrorist that they can have Trump rant and rave about. Of course, once they get their back door, they can then use it for whatever they like...

I do not think it's paranoia at all. The govmint should be looked at with a critical eye in everything it does.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Apple says they've complied with similar requests more than 70 times in the past. So it doesn't seem like an undue burden if they never fought it before. As long as the authorities keep doing it on a case-by-case basis and don't ask Apple for some sort of master key.

Those were all iPhone's running iOS 8.4 or lower. For which lots of private hackers have exploits to get past the PINs, and for which Apple had standard utility software it used for this purpose. Because of how Apple re-engineered PIN code security in iOS 9, it's more difficult and Apple doesn't have said utility software at the ready--no such software can exist (the old software just required you plug your iPhone into a computer via USB and there was a desktop application that could open the phone--this requires building a custom firmware that doesn't exist at present and signing it then loading it onto the iPhone.)

[dps]

This is basically about a lot more than this guys iPhone, which is why the Beebs of the world just LOVE a case like this. This is about a  much more fundamental question.

Does anyone have the right to own something the government *cannot* get at? Is it acceptable to create a product that the Beebs of the world cannot break into no matter how much they REALLY REALLY want to?

Suppose that a supposedly completely uncrackable safe was developed.  Someone who is being investigated for a crime (let's forget the terrorist angle and suppose it's just an ordinary garden variety crime for monetary profit) has such a safe installed as a wall safe in their home, and may have placed documents relevant to the criminal investigation in the safe.  Does that mean that the documents must go unexamined, even if the government has a warrant to search the home?

Well, no.  In such a case, the government has the right (actually, the duty, IMO) to try to find a way to open the safe, and certainly requesting help from the designer/manufacturer of the safe is reasonable.  However, the question here is, if the designer/manufacturer of the safe isn't willing to help voluntarily, to what extent does or should the government have the power to force them to help.  My personal take on that question would be that in the US, while no one has the right to actively obstruct a criminal investigation, no one should have any obligation whatsoever to actively assist in an investigation, either.  But I would base that on the 13th Amendment, and I don't think that argument will fly with the courts.  I'd note that when Federal tax withholding legislation was enacted some businesses tried to argue that the 13th Amendment didn't allow the government to force them to act as tax collectors, and the courts didn't buy the argument then.

[MadImmortalMan]

Caucus is crowded. Might take a while.

[Admiral Yi]

This is basically about a lot more than this guys iPhone, which is why the Beebs of the world just LOVE a case like this. This is about a  much more fundamental question.

Does anyone have the right to own something the government *cannot* get at? Is it acceptable to create a product that the Beebs of the world cannot break into no matter how much they REALLY REALLY want to?

That's not the issue here, since Apple presumably can crack the phone.

Your question is much more applicable to the debate on encryption.

[Phillip V]

Caucus is crowded. Might take a while.

Send us a picture of the crowd.

[garbon]

I would not be as concerned about this issue, were it not for the fact that the FBI is involved.

Marshals Task Force wanted to get this guy to his front door at zero dark thirty once;  asked the power company to park a couple of trucks in front of his house, make it look like a gas emergency. 
FBI guy showed up when it was all over, but was thoroughly impressed how the Bureau "really made these trucks look real". 

True fucking story.  They're absolute fucking morons.  Seriously.

NCIS is just as bad.

Worse. Look at that TV show!

[Razgovory]

Okay, Tim what is the proper procedure the government should undertake to look at the Cell phone?

The Beeb laid out the proper procedure. As I said that's not the problem. The problem is that the government will not follow the procedure.

Okay, so government can't ever investigate because it's government?  That's a rather silly stance.

[Razgovory]

Okay, Tim what is the proper procedure the government should undertake to look at the Cell phone?

The government can do all they want to look at the cell phone. What they are asking for is for the manufacturer of the said cell phone to devise a back door allowing them to do so - there is no proper procedure they can undertake to get that.

They are asking for the backdoor so they can look at the cell phone.  Unless you took my post extremely literally (I am holding a Cell phone in my hand, I can see it), they are not able to look at it.

[dps]

Okay, Tim what is the proper procedure the government should undertake to look at the Cell phone?

The Beeb laid out the proper procedure. As I said that's not the problem. The problem is that the government will not follow the procedure.

Okay, so government can't ever investigate because it's government?  That's a rather silly stance.

Yeah, it's silly, but it seems to be the stance of several posters here.  I don't get it.  I mean, I certainly understand the idea of not trusting the government and not wanting to give it too much power, but that's why we require search warrants in the first place.  If you take the positions some people here seem to be taking, that we can't trust law enforcement to stay within the bounds of judicial oversight, then it would seem that you should be opposed to the police ever being allowed to get a search warrant, but it wouldn't matter, because they'd just illegally search your stuff anyway.

[Martinus]

Trump smash.

[celedhring]

AP and NBC calling it for Trump already. Isn't it a bit early?

EDIT: ABC too.

[Phillip V]

AP and NBC calling it for Trump already. Isn't it a bit early?

No.  The initial results and exit polls seem to match the pre-primary polls.  A reasonable projection.

[katmai]

Ugh, now more of listening to legbiter.