Slashdot Mirror


Godfather Of Encryption Explains Why Apple Should Help The FBI (bgr.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Famed cryptographer and Turing Award winner, Adi Shamir, has an interesting if not surprising take on Apple's current legal tussle with the FBI. While speaking on a panel at RSA Conference 2016 earlier this week, the man who helped co-invent the vaunted RSA algorithm (he's the 'S' in RSA) explained why he sides with the FBI as it pertains to the San Bernardino shooter's locked iPhone. It has nothing to do with placing trapdoors on millions of phones around the world," Shamir explained. "This is a case where it's clear those people are guilty. They are dead; their constitutional rights are not involved. This is a major crime where 14 people were killed. The phone is intact. All of this aligns in favor of the FBI." Shamir continued, "even though Apple has helped in countless cases, they decided not to comply this time. My advice is that they comply this time and wait for a better test case to fight where the case is not so clearly in favor of the FBI."

5 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What a crock by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well to be accurate he is on the payroll of Weizmann Institute of Science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... So rather than being on the FBI payroll he is more likely on the Mossad payroll and actually spends most of his time specialising in "Differential cryptanalysis is a general form of cryptanalysis applicable primarily to block ciphers, but also to stream ciphers and cryptographic hash functions. In the broadest sense, it is the study of how differences in information input can affect the resultant difference at the output. In the case of a block cipher, it refers to a set of techniques for tracing differences through the network of transformations, discovering where the cipher exhibits non-random behaviour, and exploiting such properties to recover the secret key." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ie breaking encryption. So yeah, self serving dick wants to make his life easier, so basically what ever he says, do the fucking opposite and do not trust anything from him.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Re: What a crock by Shoten · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Only if you're an idiot. It's only about the one phone until precedent is made.

    This.

    And Apple's statement to this effect has already been proven true...for there are multiple cases where the FBI has asked for "just this one phone" to be unlocked in this manner. There are literally more than a dozen parallel efforts, in addition to this one particularly high-profile one, to get this to happen.

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  3. Re: What a crock by plover · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Shamir is also being disingenuous when he said, "even though Apple has helped in countless cases, they decided not to comply this time." Apple's cooperation in the prior cases was in recovering unencrypted data. They have never provided a way to decrypt data when they don't have the keys, or recover keys locked in the secure enclave.

    --
    John
  4. Re:There won't be a better test case by plover · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The summary is very misleading. Apple's compliance has only been in recovering unprotected data. They have never provided access into the Secure Enclave to recover the keys, and have never recovered data encrypted by those keys before.

    The FBI hopes that by whipping up national hatred for these mass murderers it will spark a public outcry in favor of forcing vendors to provide defective encryption, U.S. government access to escrow keys, or other back door. Many Americans have been taught by the fear-mongers running the talk radio business to be so craven that they'll agree to any violation of anyone's rights because 'terrorists'.

    --
    John
  5. Re: What a crock by buck-yar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So what is that NSA meta data program for then?