Slashdot Mirror
More Than Half of Americans Think Apple Should Comply With FBI, Finds Pew Survey (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Apple may not have the public's support in its legal fight with the FBI, according to a recently published Pew report. In a survey that reached 1,000 respondents by phone over the weekend, Pew researchers found 51 percent of respondents believed Apple should comply with FBI demands to weaken security measures on an iPhone used in the San Bernardino attacks, in order to further the ongoing investigation. Only 38 percent of respondents agreed with the company's position.
Limiting the sample to respondents who own a smartphone only improved the numbers somewhat, changing them to a 50-41 split in the FBI's favor. Among those who own an iPhone, the numbers are even closer, but still in the FBI's favor 47 to 43 percent.
Limiting the sample to respondents who own a smartphone only improved the numbers somewhat, changing them to a 50-41 split in the FBI's favor. Among those who own an iPhone, the numbers are even closer, but still in the FBI's favor 47 to 43 percent.
More than half of Americans are wrong.
I find it odd. I don't know anyone who thinks Apple should help the government. I realize this is the definition of anecdote ... but still, this seems odd.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Just shows how ignorant most of our American population is with technology.
I would tend to believe that the question is invalid.
Doing the right thing is a hard, thankless job that often earns scorn from the people you're helping the most. If you're in to activism for fame, glory, and a feel good fun time you're in for a sour surprise.
Reasons $AAPL and Cook won't help investigate a mass murder sound like Calhoun ranting about States Rights c. 1860. Rights to do what?
According to TFA:
"In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls."
I can't find any link to the actual question(s) used and I suspect those first and above ANYTHING else for causing the responses that were given.
Isn't there a compromise? Can't Apple unlock this individual phone without providing the government a universal backdoor? From what I understand, the county has given them permission to unlock the phone, so we aren't treading on the 4th amendment.
Journal
More than half of the American population has the IQ of a turnip, and those are the smart ones.
We have a special place for those with IQs lower than their shoe size. It's called Congress.
are idiots as well.
More than half of Americans think Picard is better than Shatner. What does it prove? That more than half of Americans are idiots?
One big problem with Pew studies is how they are conducted. They're often done using random telephone calling, and the people who are most educated on technology issues are also the ones least likely to pick up the phone.
Response rates are only something like 10%, and they're likely to be skewed towards the elderly. Take a look at the Snowden studies, where people over about 40 were highly skewed towards believing the government, whereas people under 40 were highly skewed towards believing Snowden, and you now understand why this poll should be taken with a grain of salt.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
wish they would have called me, but oh well.
also, just because the majority feel one way, does not mean they are correct, or even fully understand the full consequences.
This is the same crowd that vote Republicrat/Democan because their daddies voted Republicrat/Democan even when the candidates have a long track record of violating the Constitution. To over half of the people, the constitution is meaningless because not many care about personal liberties as they feel "I've got mine" so they have no need to care until they are affected directly by the government unconstitutionally.
I would tend to believe that the question is invalid.
They likely did not ask the obvious followup: "Would your answer change if you knew the NSA already had this information, and the FBI just hasn't asked for it?"
In fact, in my experience, the majority is wrong quite a lot.
Fortunately, this is not a popularity contest. The question is whether the government can compel a company to rewrite its products to make it easy for the government to snoop on its customers. If they can, it's only a small jump to forcing companies to include a backdoor in their products in the first place.
Well, maybe that they prefer people who can act to people whose main acting accomplishment was their ability to suck in their beer belly for over 200 episodes.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
would include me I suppose and I support apple in this decision. Even though I will never own an apple device.
We keep on getting fed media of fear. Rational discourse of events and ideas showing the actual scale of things, just doesn't make money.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The right way to ask it is "Do you think Apple should help the FBI, even though it helps Russian hackers get into your phone?"
That might change a few people's minds.
More Than 500 Cherrypicked Americans Completely Clueless About How Encryption Works, Finds Pew Survey
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Most of them have no clue about anything but "FBI wants terrorist iphone unlocked."
Case in point, listening to NPR this morning they had an "expert" on that said that apple shouldn't be forced to create a backdoor to add to a phone, but they should be required to unlock any existing phones.
Considering the so-called expert was a government spook, was that "opinion" a surprise?
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Chances are they are calling only landline owning citizens which is a self-selecting bunch-- where if they aren't a paranoid Slashdotter is more likely to know who's winning in the NASCAR circuit than they shit all about technology or their rights.
FUD article.
Please don't pose these sort of articles, it's really degrading for a lot of us who actually understand statistics to be pushed bad stats on a site like this...
PROTHERO: Do you believe this crap, Dascombe?
This isn't exaggeration or hyperbole, especially since the FBI said they only want a firmware update on this single phone under Apple's auspices.
Fuck them.
They can have the data they want tomorrow two ways:
(1) Have a FISA court order the NSA to give them the data, since it's just traffic analysis and MMS/SMS data the FBI wants, and NSAs PRISM collects that.
(2) Let Apple do a hardware hack on the phone, desolder the flash, socket it, and reset it on every 4th attempt until it's cracked.
Quit fucking asking for a tool to get the data that can be applied to every phone. There is no such tool, if such a tool were possible to create (and I was discussing this today at lunch with the guy who *designed* the security architecture in question: it's doubtful), it would take *man decades* to create it.
You guys who like "total control" over your hardware and software are, at some point down this horrific line, in greater danger than the Apple fans you so love to sneer at.
You'll soon find yourself carrying an "illegal comms device", if Apple loses.
We all thought soviet communism was bad but we are on a crash course for something much worse in the "free west".
How many Americans side with the NRA -v- Government one wonders?
Is it just me or has logic reasoning been deported from the USA in advance of all the illegal immigrants that "King Joffery" Trump is gunning for?
"The heresy of heresies was common sense... " - 1984
I don't know anyone that supports the US Government on this - at least - I don't know anyone who supports them and knows anything about PKI encryption and what it means - if you really want to support the folks arguing for the US Gov in this case, ask if they'll hand all their passwords and PIN's to the FBI. See what their reaction is then.
It's happening right now -- more people care about "safety" and would gladly give up our rights in order to live in a Police State. And with Trump being almost certain to be our next President, you can be sure as hell our rights will be stripped away in the blink of an eye as he calls for religious prosecution of all muslims, mass deportations of all brown people and steps up to give the people the Orwellian Police State they want and crave.
the secular, so called 'liberal', establishment governing usa and rest of west are past masters at manipulating public opinion.
they propagate an ideological narrative that says 'we were and are always the good guys, and live in the best state possible ', regardless of facts.
they scare the people by exaggerating threats( from terrorists and other states like russia and iran) as existential threats.
they hide the cost of wars(hide both blood and money lost).
they feed mass welfare appetites making them feel freely entitled to lots of things, that need to be fed by looting others in other countries.
they use to their benefit the prevailing west's superficial culture of death and waste, with its lack of moral foundations and ignorance of past traditions. they distort whatever traces of tradition that remain selectively ( so its ok to kill millions of unborn regardless of bible, but israel must be kept for jews because that is what must happen before second coming ).
etc etc..
so wonder american sheeple elect mass murders like bush, clintons, obama etc .
and it is no surprise they are willing to give up freedom and privacy, to get spied on to have an illusion of security, from a small threat.
so much for "land of the free and the home of the brave"!
--
btw there are real threats from terrorists and others, but they are not as big as propagated.
Have you personally met either, or especially both of them? If you had, you might be changing your mind.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Doing the right thing is a hard, thankless job that often earns scorn from the people you're helping the most.
Exactly. You really got to appreciate the hardship that Trump is going through to Make America Great Again.
VOTE TRUMP 2016
John Oliver famously coined the "dick-pic" angle of looking at the surveillance programs Snowden helped reveal. The resulting understanding in the masses when you boiled down the question to "can the government see my dic pics" showed a massive reversal of general opinion (IMO).
Something similar is needed here. Perhaps the question should be reworded to "Should the FBI be able to force Apple to rewrite their systems so that an Apple phone will unzip your pants to see if you have a penis or not?" Because at this point there is no evidence (that I've heard) that there is anything pertinent on the phone. Only the possibility that there *might* be. Much the same as there is a 50/50 chance that any particular person may have male genitalia under their pants. Hmm.. Schrodinger's Dick Pic???
More the half voted for Dubya...
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Privacy may win today. But then tomorrow privacy will find itself in the next battle.
Ultimately, privacy will lose. It only needs to lose once.
The fact is, privacy is not going to win.
Which means this battle here today isn't important. A win today is just a short delay from what is ultimately going to happen anyway.
Tell us that excrement is a great place to make babies in.
Should we listen to them too?
People with a telephone line to their home are less likely to understand technology.
sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
1,000 people who over the weekend answer an unknown phone number and complete a robo-survey. I'm guessing that it is the bottom of the barrel scrapings when it comes to technical knowledge and near that of common sense. Then again of the small sample of humanity I encounter everyday most have very little knowledge that I would consider to be common and some I question how they made it as long as they have.
... use Android and don't care about privacy anyways,
I have a friend who is very right-wing nut job. In most cases he's staunchly "anti-big-gub'mint." Yet in this case, he thinks that Apple is being downright traitorous. I guess the only thing he hates more than Uncle Sam's grubby paws on his cell phone, is terr'ists. So strange. I even pointed out that this is forcing a company to do something on behalf of the government. When "Obamacare made Hobby Lobby provide abortions," he got all upset about that. But it's OK if it's Apple working for the FBI. WTF?!
In other words some hundreds of people could create it in a month. Color me unimpressed by the level of difficulty. IF, that is (and it's big IF) your premise is accurate.
Based on government, Apple can unlock it, but won't help!
Based on Apple, Apple CANNOT unlock the phone!! (assuming the device will self destruct after 10 wrong tries)
This reminds me of a talk by Rick Roderick's (on movie Magus) on the inability to do something even if you want/have to.
So the question is, can Apple unlock the phone?
Because that is how decision are made in this country anymore. Just take a random survey and analyze the social media posts. Whichever side has the most activity wins. God damned the Constitution.
Then we are lost.
...of the people are of below average intelligence, too, don't you?
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
More than half of Americans are mind-numbingly stupid motherfucking bastards. Tell us something we DON'T know.
This is year 7 of the Obama train wreck and month 14 of an utterly incompetent and do-nothing Repugnican control of both houses of Congress.
Come on. If Slashdot is the IT crowd then it is already well known that the majority (users) are not capable of making decent judgments. Nothing new here, move along.
They blinded me with shiney. (with apologies to Thomas Dolby).
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Good thing the Constitution & the law aren't a 'popularity contest'...I don't CARE what 'the public thinks'...the question is one of 'legal rights'...society can't be beholden to the '50% below the curve'..
The survey goes far in implying that the question is whether Apple should help to unlock THAT SPECIFIC IPHONE. The one used by the terrorists: "As the standoff between the Department of Justice and Apple Inc. continues over an iPhone used by one of the suspects in the San Bernardino terrorist attacks, 51% say Apple should unlock the iPhone to assist the ongoing FBI investigation."
Ironically, it's not even fully clear about this, the question is "In response to court order tied to ongoing FBI investigation of San Bernadino attacks, Apple... should unlock iPhone / Should not unlock iPhone".
But holy shit, if we were talking about the specific iPhone carried by these guys, then it's crazy to argue that Apple shouldn't help to unlock it. If Apple CAN unlock it - as in, if they have a key that makes it possible to unlock it - are you arguing that they should withhold that key from the FBI? Like if someone literally held the key to a lockbox belonging to a mass murdering member of a terrorist organisation, they should not be compelled to give that up or penalized if they don't?
This debate is NOT whether the Apple should assist the FBI in unlocking one specific iPhone. The situation is that Apple has apparently made lockboxes they don't have the keys for, and whether they should be forced to design all future lockboxes with spare keys. I suspect far more would answer yes to the former question than the latter.
In the long run, it's actually in the public's best interest for Apple to lose this case. Apple left a weakness in their phone. Weather they did this intentionally is beside the point. If Apple wins this case, it sends a message to Apple, and to other phone manufacturers, that it's ok to leave a backdoor in your phone. Now you're probably saying, but if Apple wins, it means the government can't make use of those backdoors. That's an awful lot of faith right there. How confident are you that some mole at Apple won't leak the signing key to some government agency or sell it to China? Or maybe some hacker group gets a hold of the signing key through social engineering? If you want the public to be truly secure in our communications, then we needs phones that are not just inconvenient to decrypt, but impossible to. If Apple loses this case, it will send a message to all the phone manufacturers that unless you want to face a similar fate, you better make sure that your phones are 100% secure instead of 99% secure.
What's the response rate to:
"Should Apple give the FBI a key to unlock all iPhones?"
If context is needed, try:
"... to help the FBI investigate the work phone of a terrorist who is already dead and already destroyed his personal phone?"
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
When it says "Plus or Minus 3.7%" and the official number is 1% over "Half of Americans", then "More than Half of Americans" is significantly aspirational and smacks of bias.
It all depends on how you ask the question. You can get more than half of poll respondees to answer either way. Incidentally, they assume (or, rather, they want us to assume) that the small number of people they asked were representative of the entire nation.
Pew pew pew... Pew pew..
Take that, FBI.
On a more serious note. I think the study's full of crap. I for one don't think Apple should comply, and as 51% owner of America don't think they should and I wasn't asked.
Why didn't they go for the gold and just make stuff up with something like "should Apple stop breaking the law?" They'd get more yes responses then. Try asking "should Apple write software if FBI demands that they do?" And see how many positives you get then.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
The results of this poll on Applegate are remarkably similar to a polls on the US Constitution presented as if it were some radical new proposal:
http://www.constitution.org/co...
And if you get nine women together, you can get a baby in one month!
You're missing part of the equation here, bub.
More than half of Americans are un-American.
Throw them out. Keep America for Americans.
PS Don't send them to Canada, we don't want them either.
That time, the question was "should this radical proposed document be adopted?" accompanied by the actual US Constitution. And the results were roughly the same:
http://www.constitution.org/co...
Did the pollsters add the information that the court limits it to this phone, and apple would have to create and test a new version of the iOS operating system code at the expense of potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars and likely a possibility of having to specifically hire additional people to make up for the diversion of resources internally in Apple to comply, as well as potentially delay the release of new versions of the iOS software in the normal flow, as well as potentially ripple the delay to delaying new products?
...
People seem to think this requires no effort or expense on Apple's part to comply with the request, where the reality is it affects the iOS family devices as a whole, and carries a considerable expense.
Additionally it is to cover for the sloppy government handling of the iCloud account associated with the phone in the first place.
And the open liability issue if their one of a kind OS version, tied to a single device and no other, fails catastrophically. Testing alone would be a nightmare as you'd have to duplicate the essential elements of the target phone on a test device, and then test against it
Tim Cook is correct in denying compliance. It opens a huge can of worms (read liability) on Apple. And Tim's job is not to give the government free services and incur liability that can be avoided. It is to protect the fiduciary rights of the stockholders.
I think if the pollsters included a scale of what amount of money Apple should spend on compliance, as well as what amount of delay is acceptable for Apple's product shipment dates given as multiple choice questions, the results would be very different. You could be talking about delaying the next releases over a significant time period where apple not only losses expenses related to the compliance directly, but losses due to product delays and loss of market share as unencumbered companies have a DOJ wedge edge created.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
What, exactly, was the wording of the question?
Chances are that could have had quite a lot to do with the respondents' answers, in either direction.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Does anyone believe these poll's any more? I stopped believing this type of stuff when I was in my teens.
And if you get nine women together, you can get a baby in one month!
Well, you'd need a guy too.
I'm willing to volunteer, in the name of Science.
#DeleteChrome
Lying and Fudging The Numbers for decades in order to further push and justify totalitarian agendas
cant we just split into two countries already
Idiots!
Half the US believe the earth is a few thousand years old so how on earth are you supposed to find smart people capable of making an informed decision.
Look, its very simple. This is all about the concern of misuse (or non-use) of search warrants to obtain information that is otherwise private.
Do you think it would be okay if you were allowed to build a room no one could gain access too?
Do you think it would be okay if you were somehow able to scramble your dna?
When properly used, a search warrant protects citizens from unlawful search and seizure. Law enforcement should be able to search your phone given due process (and yes, maybe that would mean they have to seize it, get a warrant, and have a 3rd party (Apple?) decrypt the phone with tools that ONLY the 3rd party has access too).
Now, the problem is that the well has been poisioned post-Snowden. We simply don't trust that the tool will stay with the 3rd party (Apple). We simply don't trust the government will not abuse the search warrant procedures, or just simple seize and search without a warrant, or get the warrant after the fact. We don't trust the government, and repairing this trust is going to take a lot of effort on the part of government.
But don't think you have a right to absolute privacy when it comes to the contents of your phone, because it's simply not true, just like it's not true for your person, your car, your house, your land, or even your communications. That absolute right does not exist, and although we do have the right to avoid unlawful search and seizure, all it takes is a properly authorized search warrant to get around that.
Now, having said all that, this one phone I think likely has nothing on it, so this is a battle that's really not worth fighting. If I was a terrorist, the absolute LAST thing I would do is use a phone issued by my employer to discuss "Allahu Akbar" type details of my upcoming attack. Although these people were crazed, they were not CRAZY.
More than half of Americans can go eat a bag of dicks.
When I heard the Donald calling for a boycott against Apple, my first thought was "Are any of Trump's supporters smart enough to use an iPhone?"
From that perspective, it might be a hollow threat. It seems certain that Apple wants to claim to be innovative, not authoritarian. If the people who like the Donald already hate Apple and love the FBI, then Apple should not care less about the threat.
Then again I see the use of Apple products as mostly being a fashion statement, and if Trumpism represents some sort of fashion statement, then it also confirms my low opinion of fashion.
My main conclusion is that this is political opportunism--by the FBI. They see this as a wedge they can use to outlaw encryption and destroy the last shreds of our privacy, and to heck with the Bill of Rights and anything else that interferes with their authoritarian mindset.
Present company excluded, of course. I proclaim that my own Mac is purely for research purposes not fashion. Mostly interested in voice dictation, not privacy. I'm just playing with the Tor networks, and of course I would never have anything to hide, such as sensitive medical information about myself or my family.
Remember, when encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption--and having the encryption will by definition make them outlaws no matter what else is going on.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Because, unfortunately, the vast majority of citizens of the United States of America are blithering idiots. I live here. It's sad. There is a true willingness, even a desire, to embrace the culture of ignorance. Tune out, turn off, allow others to think for you, mindlessly believe any drivel fed to you. It's a cesspool of dimwits joyously proud of their ignorance and stupidity. To be honest it's downright frightening sometimes. But I think it runs even deeper than because I'm not just talking about people being let down by a poor public education system, which is admittedly woeful. I'm not talking only about the willfully idiotic. I'm also talking about people who are truly, fundamentally, stupid. I would not be at all surprised to discover than more than 50% of the citizens possess a sub-100 IQ. I'm seriously worried that there may be something wrong environmentally causing cognitive issues / brain damage. Something is very, very, wrong.
Ask Americans if Iphones should be banned from sale to terrorists. Wait for "more than half" to say yes, pass it as a law and try to enforce it...
No one asked me, my answer would be no fing way. Bunch of sheep willing to give their rights away for nothing. Well, pi55 off. I'd like to see all of these sheep hold their breath for an hour or two, under about 100 feet of water.
1) Even though it is true the NSA/CIA collects information on US-ians, this activity is highly illegal and unconstitutional. There is also the problem (which the NSA has admitted) of searching through the information. Yes, there are large collections of data but in general, beyond immediate interception, they're incapable of using their tech.
2) Although it is technically possible, you would need some very good reverse engineers to wipe away layer by layer of the security chip and read both the pin and the public keys out of memory with an electron microscope to then unlock the data from the chip. This is well beyond the capabilities of Apple and requires a government agency with access to a private forensics lab with the equipment and knowledge. The largest nations in this world may have 1 or 2 labs each but this is to spy on other nations' leaders, not to pursue some simple criminal suit.
3) The point of this exercise is for the US government to expand it's power. If they get what they want, they will be able to legally spy on everyone's phone with minimal amount of 'expense'. Right now, each iteration of iOS or Android requires them to do research in order to be able to crack them and the criminal entities are way better at it than they are. This way, they wouldn't need any labs or researchers, they could just force US manufacturers to build in backdoors in everything.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
In other words some hundreds of people could create it in a month. Color me unimpressed by the level of difficulty. IF, that is (and it's big IF) your premise is accurate.
Hundreds of people as qualified as the creator of the architecture.
Let's say Fred Brooks was wrong, and all engineers are equivalent cogs that can be replaced by any other cog. It's just a lot of typing, right?
So let's also say "hundreds" is "300".
So 300 x 1 month = 100 x 3 months = 25 x 12 months ... OK, that's ballpark for "man decades" if that "s" translates to 2.5.
What do 25 engineers of that calibre cost for a year? Well, minimally, you are looking at 2 x their salary -- that's the "flooring cost" for an engineer, and equipment, and rent, and computers, and ... that you have to pay them.
What do you think this guy got in stock options and base pay for one year of work? So basically... you are looking at a minimum of about $100M, with no guarantee that they outcome is possible.
Can Apple pay this out of petty cash? Probably. Will they? No. Should they? Hell no! This is (effectively) contract work for the FBI: they get to pay any costs, and the outcome is uncertain.
But wait! If Apple has 300 engineers of this calibre working on the thing for a month ... what about their opportunity costs? That $100M is just to cover expenses related to keeping these people working and the lights on. During that month: they can't work on any Apple products, because they are too damn busy working on cracking the iPhone in software for the FBI!
Apple loses whatever work product those engineers would have produced in that month, plus whatever value in time to market that that one month lead would have gained them on any competitors, and they lose that lead *in perpetuity*. And you know that if Apple is paying an engineer *that* much, they are going to be making at least *twice* that much off their labors. Or they wouldn't be willing to pay them.
So now we are in the 1/5th to 1/4 billion dollar ballpark for the work.
OR.
The FBI could just pay some ordinary engineer $30,000 to pull the flash chip, and reset it every 4 tries, up to 250 times.
Tell me again why Apple should do it the FBI's way instead of the *easy* way?
Average IQ is 100. We must be talking about the =99 half?
"Hello? ... Yes, of course I trust the FBI with, um, my privacy, and, uh, the NSA too, yeah, they're great guys, all of them, and they wouldn't be listening to this call, right now, because I'm not in any way a terrorist, and therefore have nothing to hide, bye!"
Half of americans have less than the "average" intelligence. Perhaps the "bell curve" is wrong.
Nearly half of American disbelieve evolution and think the world was created 6000+ years ago. So, when you have so many people even disbelieving the most successful predictive theory in biology, I don't expect that many either to udenrstand complex themes like encryption, walled garden, and civil right to privacy.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
That may be true if and only if you can find hundreds of people that 1) are willing to work on this project, 2) are very well versed in (breaking) encryption, and 3) know the source tree of iOS in and out. There may be a couple hundred that fulfil the last criteria, the overlap with the first two will be very small. There is the chance that some of the people that could do it are principled enough to resign from Apple and start to work for one of the competitors (if you have such skills that shouldn't be too hard to do).
If I were to have such skills and if I were to be (in part) responsible for the design and implementation of what is arguably one of the most secure consumer devices in the world, I would take great pride in my work. Being asked to undo such an accomplishment, is a really, really big thing. This is an issue that is often enough ignored: the actual people doing the work. Apple may be a company, but a company is made up of people, and if there are no people that are willing and able to perform a certain task, it won't happen, valid court order or not.
And if you get nine women together, you can get a baby in one month!
Yes, you can - after a 9-month start-up time.
are likely to vote for Trump in November... what does that tell you
They are Trump supporters?
What if 1234 unlocks the phone? That would be hilarious.
There is the chance that some of the people that could do it are principled enough to resign from Apple and start to work for one of the competitors (if you have such skills that shouldn't be too hard to do).
If I were to have such skills and if I were to be (in part) responsible for the design and implementation of what is arguably one of the most secure consumer devices in the world, I would take great pride in my work. Being asked to undo such an accomplishment, is a really, really big thing. This is an issue that is often enough ignored: the actual people doing the work. Apple may be a company, but a company is made up of people, and if there are no people that are willing and able to perform a certain task, it won't happen, valid court order or not.
Job interview:
Q: "What did you do at your last job that makes you feel you are qualified to work on cryptographic systems?"
A: "Wrote cryptography hard enough to break that the FBI invoked the All Writs Act of 1789 to try and force my company to break it"
Q: "Reason for leaving last job?"
A: "They asked me to comply with the request, so I quit."
Hired!
You know, the ones who are envious of the fact that Apple's devices haven't been compromised.
Except that everything you wrote is bullshit. The backdoor already exists. Apple has the keys to sign the software. Apple's caved, very quietly, to the Chinese government. This is nothing more than a PR stunt. Add in that you would never be able to prosecute on the basis of any evidence on an iphone if the FBI reused the code without a license (yes, it's inherently copywritten; the FBI may not use it without permission). And, Apple wouldn't be kowtowing to the FBI, but a federal judge.
So tell me, who's acting above the law? Is it a multinational that uses slave labor or the FBI that has a valid search warrant?
How many would agree if we were talking about their smartphone, specifically? Because whether they know it or not, we very much are.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This just in...
Half of people have an intelligence that is below average!
Dead or alive, the shooters could have no expectation of privacy. The phone belonged to San Bernardino County. Tough shit!
I am strongly in favor of privacy, but I would not expect my privacy to extend to somebody else's device.
Apple hacks this specific phone. They then shore up whatever vulnerabilities that were in iOS/their hardware design that made such a hack impossible.
Their design should have made it flat out impossible. An encryption processor has the key to the phone's data in memory. If more than 10 passcode attempts are made, it deletes the key. Boom, data is gone. No takebacks. Firmware on that processor should have been locked and fused.
If this were actually how they implemented it, there would BE a controversy. They'd respond that it's totally impossible, and invite the FBI's tech experts to view the design under NDA to confirm for themselves. They'd explain that they would comply if they could, but it isn't possible.
A funny thing about a republic is that no one can vote away another person's rights.
Let's say we do live in a true democracy. I get enough people to agree with me on something, like perhaps that people that take welfare should not get to vote. If you don't pay a net income to the government then you cannot have a say on how that money is spent. Then next year I get a smaller group of people to agree with me, only landowners get to vote. Why not? If you don't actually own the land then why should you get to vote?
Now that I've narrowed the field quite a bit I might have to be a bit more careful on picking my allies. I might be able to find a majority of men that think that women should not be able to vote. Perhaps I make this a religious cause. Those that do not pray to the great pasta in the sky should not be allowed to vote. Then I keep redefining who gets to vote year after year until it's just me and my inner circle of friends. We used democracy to become what is effectively a monarchy.
But it doesn't have to be a vote on who gets to vote. It could be a vote on who gets the guns. No guns for you and yours, we'll just leave you to fight off the armed thugs with your fists, feet, and teeth. Perhaps I vote away your healthcare, let you die off from a lack of shots against tetanus, flu, and meningitis.
Or here's an idea, I vote away your right against unwarranted search and seizure. I'm trying to protect you from the evil terrorists in the world. So I go about listening to phone calls, poke around your backyard. If I find a wild marijuana plant then I can assume you're growing the stuff in your basement, then I take your house. Your kid thought it would be "cute" to fashion a bong in art class, obviously you are selling drugs so I take your house. I think you bought too much cold medicine, so I lock you up for five years. I think you bought too much diesel fuel, ammonia, and fertilizer, I don't care if you have 600 acres of farmland, you are obviously making bombs and meth. I take your farm and lock you up.
Oh, wait, maybe we don't live in a republic any more.
A republic means that an individual has rights, in spite of what removal of those rights might mean to the benefit of the whole. If we can vote away the rights of any one person, even if we think that person is evil incarnate, then no one's rights are safe. The FBI lost the ability to snoop on us as it wished through a series of gains in technology and civil rights cases. They want that back. If we believe we live in a democracy, and lose the basis of a republic in our laws, then we'll have the government prop up one bogeyman after another to convince us to vote our rights away.
Those that choose security over liberty will get neither. I think a wise man warned us about this many years ago.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
More than half of americans that can be contacted by Pew, never bothered to add themselves to Do Not Call lists, have the time to answer surveys and don't mind giving their opinions to a stranger that called them unprompted. A full half of respondents had a landline - so half might as well be labeled as techno-illiterates whose opinion is as relevant to the matter at hand as Nebraskan's opinions on California nude beach policies.
Q: "What did you do at your last job that makes you feel you are qualified to work on cryptographic systems?"
A: "Wrote cryptography hard enough to break that the FBI invoked the All Writs Act of 1789 to try and force my company to break it"
See this is where I fundamentally disagree. When I design a system the threat tree is NOT a secret and I possess no backdoors or specialized knowledge or ability to attack it beyond what is explicitly published.
Q: "Reason for leaving last job?"
A: "They asked me to comply with the request, so I quit."
The correct answer should always be you are unable to comply with any request from any actor evil or noble ... quitting out of principal means you have already failed.
Q: "Reason for leaving last job?"
A: "They asked me to comply with the request, so I quit."
The correct answer should always be you are unable to comply with any request from any actor evil or noble ... quitting out of principal means you have already failed.
On the contrary. It (1) Shields the company from the actions of the court, and (2) shields you personally from the court, since the court order was issued against the company, rather than you as a person. When you are acting on behalf of the company in a position to which a court order is applicable, it's possible for the court to hold you, personally in contempt.
We already saw this with the Elcomsoft case, and Dmitry Sklyarov.
While I agree that that should be the answer, that *being* the answer, and a court *accepting* that answer and backing off the engineer in question, are two different things.
NB: Ironically, the FBI is asking Apple to violate the DMCA by creating a circumvention device, in the same way Elcomsoft created a circumvention device. Nothing, in principle, prevents the DMCA provisions being applied to Apple by a federal prosecutor, or to a former employee by a federal procesutor, should they be involved, even if it's Apple's code. For example, if the author of the DVD CSS were to publish an exploit for it, how many media companies would go after his or her ass with torches and a pitchfork?
You can't separate security from privacy, the two are different aspects of the same thing (control over one's information), and Google is violently opposed to user privacy because it makes almost all of its money by demolishing it.
Schmidt has made abundantly clear what he thinks of user privacy --- it should not exist. Of course his own is sacrosanct.
It's been 10 years since Google launched Android, and after all that time users still haven't been given control over app access and app external communications post-install, the only option being to not run them if they give you cause for concern. It's a disaster, and it creates a wide open channel through which users' privacy and their security is escaping continually. And this horribly insecure system has the temerity to be built on top of the Linux kernel which provides all the required controls, but has had them removed. It's a travesty, and Google should be ashamed of their total disregard for user protections.
Google is "focused on security"? Don't make me laugh. Sure they're focused on security, but only their own.
First off where is the clear argument that you can't just push a firmware backdoor (software backdoor is a bad implementation of a worse idea) onto a locked Iphone. Can you? My point is unless a backdoor is already there you can't do anything with the current phone. To my point, If I think that computer code comes from the book of Revelations and seeps into my phone through osmosis you can't expect me to understand the complications around unlocking the phone let alone the consequences. Pew needs to explain the basics and THEN ask the questions. This is like polling 10 year olds on math and expecting the results to be representative of the Grade School
Half of Americans are by definition, below average intelligence. Coincidence?
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
...believe in the paranormal.
Maybe it's time to quit basing real-world decisions on the ridiculous assumption that everybody's opinion is of equal value.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
More than half of Americans think they are above average.
(yes, I'm American :-)
Funny how being reflexively liberal gains vast positive moderation---even when it is not backed up and unfounded. Ok kids, lets play. Let's dissect this awful, thoughtless post using 3 minutes of internet searching or less
Comment 1: Mexicans are rapists:
Actually, Mexicans in the US are 3 times as likely to be rapists compared to their white counter part. Easily found in this document from the Department of Justice. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub...
Comment 2: Muslims are going to blow me up....
Do I really need to go there? Fish in a barrel are envious about easy this one is. I mean, you brought this up. But, since you asked, in the last 3 days, 157 attacks in 22 countries killing 1747 people. Number of, I don't know, choosing a country at random, Germans bombing others in same period.....0. Just saying'
http://www.thereligionofpeace....
I honestly won't touch the last once, since I really don't want to see the bestiality. sites, but but between you and me, I would not take that bet if I were you.
So, in a nut shell. This gets a 5 mod for being incorrect and supporting nothing. Nice job slashdot. Nice job.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
When a user's local information is sent to a remote service that is not in his ownership and under his exclusive control, this creates a reduction in the security of that information and in the availability of his access to it. This is not controversial, it's axiomatic in the discipline that when exclusivity of physical control is lost then security is compromised.
White can be redefined as black, but that doesn't alter the reality of its optical properties. Calling a service "secure" when it is deliberately architected to reduce security is just playing with words, and when you tell that to people who lack the background to know better, it's downright malicious.
Techies are sometimes so enthralled by the coolness of what they're doing that they forget to sit back a while and think about its wider implications. Sometimes that can turn into denial that there is anything to worry about at all, particularly when it conflicts with their prior notion of coolness or with business requirements. And then we have a really severe problem, institutionalized insecurity.
I was taught that all the security in the world effectively means nothing once someone has physical access to your system. To me, the possibility that maybe authorities haven't been able to hack into an iPhone they've gotten their grubby mitts on is almost unbelievable. Like some kind of security utopia we should only get to see on Star Trek.
But my big worry here isn't even if they can see my dick pics. It's what they can DO to me afterwards. Every time they want something, if we look at what the most out-there, least believable extremes of abuse they could possibly come up with, and we then look a few months down the line at what the only thing that was actually done with this new ability, it's *ALWAYS* the abuses. They never use this stuff to prevent a single crime or attack - only against us, while making sure the next attack they allow through is pretext enough for their next rapefest of human rights.
What's to stop them from performing industrial espionage? From altering logs so that you're guilty of things they themselves committed? From stalking your wife, or getting a hold of your children, or scheduling your dog to be killed by PETA or Police? The easier doing so gets, the more they do it, and the more they want to be able to do it from the comfort of their cushy desk!
Given this ability, why would they *ever* allow themselves to be proven or declared wrong, when they can just "solve" any crime they want, with whomever they want, whether or not one was even committed?
While I agree that that should be the answer, that *being* the answer, and a court *accepting* that answer and backing off the engineer in question, are two different things.
Where does this theory end? How is it falsified? Should everyone unplug from the Internet for fear that their computers might be hacked and used to facilitate organized crime and they might be blamed for it?
I have a hard time believing such a transparent and obvious stunt would have any effect other than royally pissing off the judge. Quitting after being asked is way too late and having them just asking someone else in the company or your replacement does not shield the company from anything. After they are sufficiently jerked around I wouldn't bet on escape.
NB: Ironically, the FBI is asking Apple to violate the DMCA by creating a circumvention device, in the same way Elcomsoft created a circumvention device. Nothing, in principle, prevents the DMCA provisions being applied to
Apple by a federal prosecutor, or to a former employee by a federal procesutor, should they be involved, even if it's Apple's code. For example, if the author of
Lawyers deserve _some_ credit.
"This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes of this subsection, the term âoeinformation securityâ means activities carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a government computer, computer system, or computer network."
I only scanned the article but I couldn't find the actual question that was asked for the poll. In my experience the result of a poll can be skewed one way or another by how the question is phrased.
I have to wonder if the question Pew asked was along the lines of "Do you think Apple should help the FBI catch terrorists?" rather than "Do you think Apple should protect peoples privacy from unwarranted government surveillance". You could ask the same group of people and get one poll showing support for Apply and another supporting FBI depending on what you ask
Part of the problem is that the US news media focuses almost exclusively on the conflict between Apple and the government. I found, for example, only one US news site (PBS) that mentioned the iPhone did not belong to the terrorist, but to his employer. And I found zero US media that reported the terrorist had a second phone which he destroyed before the attack. All this information can by found here: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/20/san-bernadino-county-fbi-gunman-apple-account
If the terrorist destroyed one phone and not another, I think this gives a fair clue as to which of the phones he considered more incriminating (of his co-conspirators or whatever). I think it is also reasonable to assume that both terrorists saw this as a one-way enterprise - ie, they would not survive it. So, by destroying one phone, we can assume a. this phone was used for some enterprise and b. that the terrorist did not want evidence of this enterprise to survive his life.
I would be very surprised if any incriminating evidence is on the iPhone. Why would a criminal use someone else's phone to plot a crime?
Lawyers deserve _some_ credit.
"This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes of this subsection, the term âoeinformation securityâ means activities carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a government computer, computer system, or computer network."
Meaning they'd still have to pay Apple to do it so that it's a contract.
Observe from Yes Prime Minister https://www.youtube.com/watch?... You will never trust an opinion poll again
Observe from Yes Prime Minister https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] You will never trust an opinion poll again
Most people are not techs obsessed with secrecy.
They should change the next version of iOS (for any hardware that it runs on including older models) and the next iPhone revision so that its not even possible to install new software on the phone if the phone is locked.
Why would that be a better thing to do? Because the house was just considering a bill banning state-mandated back doors into phones. By having this debate now, over a device with badly designed security that was used in a horrific crime, Apple is risking the failure of such bans and the possibility that state-level bans on encryption are simply allowed to stand.
No Slashdot brightest isn't it?
No where do they list the actual questions they used, so the only thing you can "take away" from it is surveys can't be trusted without full disclosure of the questions used.
The evidence does suggest more than half of US citizens don't know dick about security or encryption, which also suggests the education system is totally fucked. It's not that hard to understand "the basics" of security and encryption. Being an expert, which I am not, takes decades. You don't need to be an expert to understand what the FBI is asking is a backdoor. With respect, I say fuck any government that demands a backdoor on smart phones.
We've already proven that the American public at large are idiots and can't be trusted with decision-making power.
I've never bought into the Apple ecosystem, but I'm glad Mr. Cook is taking the high road on these issues and standing their ground in order to protect the privacy of their users.
Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
and this is why our founding fathers thought education was so important. For a democracy (even a representative one) it's even MORE so. "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one" Benjamin Franklin said that, and it's as true today as it ever was. For any government to say it's in our best interest to NOT have the ability or right to privacy in order to 'protect' us is completely full of shit.
If I sound stupid, it's not me talking....
to only people who have a grasp on how encryption in general and device encryption in particular actually work?
Preserving my rights is not subject to vote or poll. It is a CONSTITUTIONAL right.
When are are going to star calling BS on 1000 people surveys? I will spare you the math, but 1000 out 321,442,019? Really?
"More Than Half of Americans Think Apple Should Comply With FBI, Finds Pew Survey"
"In a survey that reached 1,000 respondents by phone over the weekend"
Yeah. Right. WTF.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
The FBI wants apple to unlock the phone. All I hear over and over is "we won't". What worries me most is that they don't say "we can't".
First of all, the government already has all of the information it claims it needs to retrieve. The government has said it wants his call logs and contact lists so they can go investigate those people, despite the fact that they have no probable cause to believe that any of those people are involved in criminal activity.
See, the NSA already knows everyone who has called that phone, and everyone whom that phone has called. We already know that the NSA logs every phone call made.
So, they have that information already, and have probably already investigated those people illegally. The reason they REALLY want to get the phone contents is so that they can parallel construct some probable cause to then go after those people whom they have illegally investigated.
I'm a conservative but I gotta tell you, I admire Bernie Sanders Anyone even mildly conservative should be appalled at what the Berns positions. He's an avowed socialist for cryin' out loud! This is not even a close call.
After partnership with Apple to defeat world-wide encryption tactics, they have announced that they will be installing a webcam on Schrödinger's cat, for security purposes "in an emergency". Pew study shows that more than half of Americans think we should be able to know whether Schrödinger's cat is alive.
We've seen it time and time again where the general public decided that something a minority had was better suited for public consumption. I'm not saying this is on the same magnitude, but look at the Japanese internment camps (general public approved), the Trail of Tears (general public overwhelmingly approved), slavery (general public approved in more than half of the country). There's a reason that we aren't a pure democracy in this country, because government is supposed to help protect people.
I challenge this so called PEW research. Let us see the original questions that were asked of people and let's see if it actually says "Apple should comply with FBI demands to weaken security measures on an iPhone". because I doubt it was worded that way.
Tholes polls are nothing but a way to manipulate the public. "Researchers" ask questions like "Do you think anybody should be allowed to have an atomic bomb?" then they publish the results saying something like "99% of Americas support gun control".
It's all bullshit.
is irrelevant.
And if you think the government cant hack an Iphone, you're as stupid as the loosers who think they are safe using one.
This is all a smoke screen to get all the extremists to use an Iphone.....
Rick B.
An insightful forensics article on several more important reasons why Apple should not be forced to comply.
http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/...
More than half of Americans who voted, voted for Bush Jr. Twice.
Well okay maybe almost half the first time but certainly more than half the second time around, which is why American "democracy" scares the shit out of me.
It's a fact!
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
The devil is in the details. How were the main questions worded? "Should Apple comply with the court writ to assist the government with obtaining data from a terrorist's iPhone?" is a lot different than "Should Apple be forced to create software that will break the encryption on all iPhones?"
And 1,000 people is a terrible sample size to draw any conclusions other than they asked 1,000 people questions.
So 0.0003% of the population of the United States reflects the views of the other 99.9%? I understand the concept of statistical analysis, but with that small of a sampling it seems to be more of sensationalism than anything else.
Nothing but propaganda.
This survey simply shows that about 500 people are unfit to govern themselves. Thank God this isn't a democracy! The representative republican government our Founding Fathers gave us isn't perfect but it's better than everything else.
I'm actually surprised that the results were so close because most Americans are technologically illiterate. And there are probably a lot of people like me who lie like a dog to pollsters to to mess things up. :-)
The first thing I was taught in my statistics class is how they can lie. And in a wide variety of ways. The first thing I would ask is who is asking the questions, and who wrote the questions in the first place. In addition, most of the public is so "high strung" with news designed to scare the into accepting anything with the word "security" or "anti-terrorism" they many are now psychologically programmed to say yes to anything with these key phrases in them. The fix is in folks. I just wonder if the bus for "1984" was early, or late...
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
We've been over this already with John Oliver. You are phrasing the question wrongly. The scenario needs to have dick picks on the phone somehow or else people don't think it through.
Pray thy God and thy 203 billion $ in thy bank, as soon it will loose nine zeroes.
Shocking.
You suck America. You just SUCK.
spent 5 seconds thinking about it..
Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
It seems that one with the resources of the fbi should be able to reverse engineer their own version of iOS and push it out onto devices via a local network spoofing the apple update servers. They would likely need some of apples private keys in order to trick the device that it was a legit apple server/update. But getting those seem a lot easier to get, and could draw alot less attention.
It seems that one with the resources of the fbi should be able to reverse engineer their own version of iOS and push it out onto devices via a local network spoofing the apple update servers. They would likely need some of apples private keys in order to trick the device that it was a legit apple server/update. But getting those seem a lot easier to get, and could draw alot less attention.
Why would anyone ever really tell the truth for a survey? I mean really?
I have to believe this stat is riddled with type 1 errors to push an agenda.
More than 80% of American are useful idiots who know nothing about encryption.
Wait. Don't more than half of Americans think that an invisible sky fairy with a long beard and disapproving frown is running things (when he's not delicately burying fake dinosaur bones with a smirk on his face?)
Or believe in UFOs?
Or think that there is a titanic battle between our protective father sky fairy and an armada of UFOs,
or something along those lines.
"More than half of Americans think X" doesn't tell me anything about the quality or veracity of X. It tells me quite a bit about a particular half of Americans.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
I didn't take that poll!
Weaken everyone's security so a few can feel the smug self-righteousness of temporary power.
And while these words were originally penned regarding a completely different situation, they are perfectly adequate for this situation:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”
-- Benjamin Franklin
The endless propaganda barrage of corporate media has dumbed down and terrorized the American populace to the level of zombies, zombies who have been dissuaded from critical thinking and informed political involvement, and who readily abdicate their liberties and freedom to increasingly fascist institutions. This sorry state of our nation is not accidental.
If most Apple users don't agree, Apple should oppose gov snooping.
That's simply business.
Of course they do because our countrymen are ignorant, shortsighted morons.
Should Apple allow the FBI to see your dick pics?
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
It's 2500 times, isn't it? (10000 combinations divided by 4.)
Apart from that I agree.
It's what's legal and constitutional that matters, not the latest poll likely based on a sample of 1002 people, which is artificially selected based on who has still has landline phone AND decided to participate in the poll, which artificially biases any result towards more conservative and older voters
....think Trump will be a great president. So what's the point? That Americans are dumb and care not a bit about their freedoms and their future?
I'm not trying to be extreme and sensational here, but if you did a public survey on Americans from 200 years ago, more than half of Americans might support slavery. 100 years ago, more than half of Americans might support legal punishment for homosexuality. Does that make them right?
We need a tax on tinfoil.
At times I wish I had the kind of credibility that the federal government has with half the American populace. In the brilliant light of ballooning and oppressive national debt, endless war, Snowden's revelations, and so forth, half the people in this country still respond like Pavlov's dogs when they hear a recitation of the rhetoric of the "war on terror". There IS no war on terror, because as Judge William Young pointed out in U.S. v. Reid, terrorists are not soldiers. They're criminals, and when we catch them, we prosecute them. Enemy soldiers don't get criminal process, they get shot at until they die or the war ends.
Besides which, the actual number of terrorists in the world is thought (by reasonable people, not venal politicians and bureaucrats) to be below 200,000 (https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140506/14033627137/how-many-terrorists-are-there-not-as-many-as-you-might-think.shtml). Assume an even distribution throughout the world and there are five terrorists in the city where I live. Five. Lump them all into one city and my little town still outnumbers them generously. How does one declare war collectively on a tiny and scattered set of people who don't even have enough force in their numbers to take over a country? The Israeli military could wipe them out easily. This isn't a war; it's a crusade. The fact that the same nationalistic rhetoric buys out so many idiots again and again and allows a bloated imperial regime to violate sacrosanct freedoms in the name of security should make that clear.
This isn't about security or safety at all. To the true believers and nationalists in government, it may be, but to many of them it's paranoia and power. Like RICO, the "war on terror" rhetoric is a convenient and powerful lie to urge compliance with increasingly criminal encroachments on the crucial principles our constitution was intended to protect.