Slashdot Mirror
Google CEO Finally Chimes In On FBI Encryption Case, Says He Agrees With Apple (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader writes: After Tim Cook's eloquent letter explaining why Apple wouldn't help the FBI get encrypted data from the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone, the internet looked to Google to take a similar stand. Now Google CEO Sundar Pichai has posted five tweets that seem to show he agrees with Cook.
Edward Snowden had previously suggested that Google's silence meant Google had "picked a side, but it's not the public's."
Edward Snowden had previously suggested that Google's silence meant Google had "picked a side, but it's not the public's."
I'm glad Sundar is agreeing this is an important issue... however, there are a lot of wiggle words in his phrasing.
Is it too much to ask Google to simply come out in favor of privacy of its users?
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Google copies Apple, what a surprise :-)
And as usual they don't get it quite right.
This announcement, while still unofficial as a company policy, is moving the conversation in the right direction, but if the government wants to do something, they'll do it... I can see all cockamamie reasons, such as 'aiding and abetting criminal activity.'
I'd be the first to get a Blackphone (maybe roll-your-own-Android, if possible) if Apple caves-in regarding government-mandated backdoors. Personally, I just don't see how removing encryption from public-use would ever work. If there's ever a case where I'd rather sacrifice some convenience for security, this is it... even if it means giving up smartphones.
No sig for you! Come back one year!
It's a question of honoring privacy rights in general, not a specific person's
True but this case related to iOS 8. Previous iOS versions were not as secure
I get that you're trolling, but I just came in from walking the dog and was listening to some Right Wing talk radio in between periods of the Blackhawks-Rangers game. All the Right-Wing jackoffs are going on about how Tim Cook should be jailed for contempt or treason or something or other and how a corporation giving up encryption keys and backdoors is the same as if the local cops come to your door with a warrant and we should trust the NSA and FBI and all the three-letter agencies to make sure it's only the information on one phone that is decrypted.
It just shows they don't mean a bit of it when they say how they hate Big Government. They just want Big Government on their own terms.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Oh, that's such happy horseshit. The government already has all the evidence they need in this San Bernadino case. They're trying to get their hands on a technology and set a precedent. Fuck them.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hey whipslash, on a side note...
I agree with you here, but even if I didn't - I'd like to say I find it refreshing that you're taking the time to participate in the discussions here on Slashdot. It shows that you're invested in this site in more ways than just financially, and I appreciate it!
#DeleteChrome
You're up.
For those who seek perfection there can be no rest on this side of the grave.
Want to see smoke come out of someone's ears? Ask one of the Tim-Cook-is-a-traitor, we-can-trust-the-government crowd why the FBI shouldn't break into the gun store owner's phone, where the San Bernardino shooters bought some of their firearms and brass, just to make sure nothing hinky is going on with him or his shop. You can watch the disconnect happen in their brain. "BUT THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT..." Exactly! "AND IT WOULDN'T HELP THE CASE..." Exactly!
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
this one case is a bit more tricky, since the fbi can reasonably say that apple can do what they want and it's not even that expensive. anyone with apples toolset and more importantly the signing key can do what fbi is requesting. fundamentally it's not even about 'creating' such a tool and that it would open a can of worms. it wouldn't. if something that could be created in half a day by altering a few lines would be a can of worms then it would already be a can of worms. on iphone 5C. those few lines would be the line where is the check for ten tries and the amount of delay introduced between tries. that would be enough to brute force it with a robot finger. another few hours would have the sw just brute force through all combinations on the phone itself - at just a rate of 1 per second it would be just few hours and since you can query the cpu/soc multiple times per second if the given pin is correct then if it's a 4 number pin it would take only something along the lines of half an hour, 5 number one would be still under half a day and six not too much long either. the part on the cpu on 5C that coughs up the code does not have extra protections or limits or any of that fancy stuff that 5S would do.
because it's an iphone 5C and apple _CAN_ write firmware for it and load it on the phone to brute force the correct pin on the cpu to make the cpu cough up the encryption key this is not quite how apple spins it up. but apple doesn't want to admit(nor is it denying) that it can write the requested software - it's trying to argue that it doesn't have to, I guess in order to fight off further requests to modify firmwares that actually are delivered to consumer phones, which would need backdoors installed before hand.
on iphone 5S and onwards it would not be possible. but try explaining this to a normal journalist. if apple opens it, they think that iphones all can be opened in same way - and apple has been publicly saying that they can't open them, (which is true for newer iphones than the 5C). suppose they do open it for them? what then? lawsuits from 5C owners who could arguably argue that they were mislead with marketing about the capabilities of their phone.
so, on 5C the encryption key is on the cpu and can be queried multiple times per second with the right firmware and the right firmware can be loaded on boot from usb if you have apples signing keys(or if you can break the bootloader, I suppose). that is, on an iphone 5C the penalty wipe for guessing more than 10 times is performed in firmware loaded software and can be trivially circumvented if you have firmware source code and signing key. apple doesn't deny or admit this due to marketing and that it would confuse the hell out of people who don't understand the difference between 5c and 5s.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I'm no Apple supporter, but your comparison is (heh) apples-and-oranges. In the US, it's refusing to alter its software to allow the FBI to access private data. In China, it's allowing the government to perform a security audit of its source code - you know, just like every open source project on the planet implicitly allows China to do.
I mean, by that standard, Linux is co-operating with Chinese attempts to violate the privacy of its users, because it publishes its source code for the government to audit (if they feel like it), too. And honestly, with this admission about the FBI coming into the open, it just goes to show how justified other governments are in demanding to examine US products for signs of government malfeasance.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Biased much against Google?
Cook posted a letter yesterday, Pichai responded today. OH MY GOOD HOW COULD IT TAKE SO LONG!?
If someone in my family gets hurt, I will want vengeance and retribution. I want the guilty to suffer. Death is too kind, I want to see prolonged torture, and I want to take part in it myself.
Which is why the laws are the way they are. People who are hurt generally want vengeance, not justice. That doesn't mean that it's right to give them that, or that giving them that will make society better. In fact, it will make society worse.
Just like in this case.
Sure. They forgot to make it impossible to change the battery, expand the storage, etc.
www.wavefront-av.com
Of course not, but since the Republicans on the Right are crowing about how they're the party of "small government", the hypocrisy is especially galling with them.
If someone comes out and says that they want bigger government, and mean it, I can deal with that and make an informed decision. If someone comes out and claims to want to have government small enough to drown in a bathtub and at the same time approves of ubiquitous surveillance, infinite military spending, militarized police departments, laws covering women's reproductive organs, the death penalty and the prison-industrial complex, then they're not only complicit in evil but they're bullshitting about it.
Now, have we cleared that up?
You are welcome on my lawn.