Slashdot Mirror
Apple Employees, If Ordered To Unlock iPhone, Might Quit (nytimes.com)
An anonymous reader quotes an NYTimes article: Apple employees are already discussing what they will do if ordered to help law enforcement authorities. Some say they may balk at the work, while others may even quit their high-paying jobs rather than undermine the security of the software they have already created, according to more than a half-dozen current and former Apple employees. [...] The employees' concerns also provide insight into a company culture that despite the trappings of Silicon Valley wealth still views the world through the decades-old, anti-establishment prism of its co-founders Steven P. Jobs and Steve Wozniak. [...] The fear of losing a paycheck may not have much of an impact on security engineers whose skills are in high demand. Indeed, hiring them could be a badge of honor among other tech companies that share Apple's skepticism of the government's intentions.
1. Ordered to not bow to the Steve Jobs statue every day.
2. The cafeteria/yoga center runs out of fair-trade artisanal non-GMO lemon grass smoothies.
3. Apple actually starts fixing bugs in OS X instead of focusing on SHINY in iOS.
4. Siri tells them that their auras are not in tune with the universal energy of orange.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
The link in the summary is to the login of the paywall, which makes no sense. The actual link should be: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/technology/apple-encryption-engineers-if-ordered-to-unlock-iphone-might-resist.html.
Not that anyone reads TFA...
Can't the FBI use the same encryption breaking schemes they use on SSL to brute force the certificate used to place the original firmware, then hire someone from Algeria for $20/hour to put a new firmware on it? What about that memory heat map hack where they can read software right off the storage, can't they use that to decrypt the current firmware? Are all they advertising is distrust in government? Who is profiting off of the distrust in our own government?
You're really pushing Betteridge's Law this morning.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
It might not be smart to quit if, while employed, they are under Apple's umbrella of legal protection. Alone in the wild, could employees with knowledge on how to crack the phone* be pressured to crack the phones?
* = "Hey, remember when Apple said phones couldn't be cracked? Ha, good times, good times. (cries in beer)"
I thought affirming that I'd rather quit than attend daily scrum meetings was noble and principled. Damn.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Has it come to this ? You are anti establishment if you expect the government to play fair, to obey the constitution, to not play games to get powers that it does not really need (for the purposes that it claims that it needs them for anyway) ? What are they putting into your water supply out there ?
"I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley"
people with the skills, experience, and talent to get another 6-digit salary paying swanky job in an hour with a phone call or two. These arn't people who are going to be out of work for long.
We all have our points of view, but ultimately part of the price you pay for living in a democracy is sometimes having to put up with what you consider dumb decisions made by governments and the courts and other people for voting for idiots. You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
That's why Mohandas Gandhi, Anthony of Padua, Rosa Parks, Edward Snowden, and other civil rights activists are so admired: because they followed every dumb law in existence to the letter.
It's not actually the disagreement that's likely to cause people to quit. Instead, it's the chance of a fuck up.
Suppose you do do this, and you make a mistake. You test your code like crazy, it goes via QA, and gets tested like crazy, you use it on the FBI's phone, and the device gets erased.
There's a reasonable chance that the result of these actions is that you end up in Guantanamo bay.
I'm not gonna take that risk for any salary, even a 6 figure one.
Put in the backdoor, but make it only work for the next month or so. FBI gets to hack this one phone, but can't do anything with this backdoor in the future.
This has almost nothing to do with whether or not the FBI can reuse the backdoor. It doesn't even really have much to do with encryption, except as a thin veneer over the real issues.
Rather, this one case will set a precedent for decades to come about whether the government can compel you, Joe Average, into involuntary servitude (aka "slavery") just because the FBI (or any other "legit" law enforcement agency) wants to go on an evidence-fishing trip, against both your own and your customer's interests.
The FBI hasn't asked for a preexisting key, or even just information; they've demanded nothing less than to have Apple spend time and money creating something that doesn't exist because Apple didn't want it to exist. And don't kid yourself about the "offer" to do it themselves if Apple gives them the source code - Have you ever seen the source code to any project bigger than "Hello World"? It would take *more* of Apple's time just helping the FBI set up a viable build environment. The FBI didn't ask for that because that makes it a lot more clear what they've really demanded - Slave labor. "Give us something similar to a key" sounds a lot more palatable than "do our bidding for no pay for a few weeks".
Apple can easily solve this problem by forming an independent subsidiary in Germany which will maintain keys and security settings, which is then contracted into the next iOS upgrade. The current keys should be erased at the next upgrade. Then, the German government can approve FBI warrants for the use of the keys.
For real fun, Apple should announce that the iCloud servers for U.S. Government workers are moving to China, starting with all members of congress.
Are you seriously bashing people who have morals over greed?
My question is similar, but for completely different reasons. IF they quit, they don't (directly) have the support & resources of Apple. Then the gov't can force/threaten them directly.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The FBI already has access to information they need, they are just using this as a strong arm attempt to force a company to bow to their wishes. and sadly they got a corrupt judge to go along with them.
Honestly, if every single american is not up in arms and screaming at their congress critter right now to stop this bullshit, then they need to move to soviet russia where things are more to their liking.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The federal government will try to take Apple apart piece by piece: in court, in the press, and perhaps by brain drain from people leaving.
To the government, it's very important to set a precedent where companies have to comply, in all circumstances, with any and all requests for technical assistance- regardless of the true legality. So expect ongoing government behavior to accomplish these goals.
If engineers quit over this, good for them. If Apple makes it out relatively unscathed- I'll be content.
This particular issue- might damage the company and US tech industry in ways we've not even considered yet. Consider the idea that encryption technology moves offshore from the US. Consider the competitive disadvantage if foreign encryption schemes need to be used rather than home grown ones. Would US companies be competitive? Would secure foreign technologies even be available in the US?
This whole thing is dangerous in the long term. Apple better win this or the face of technology changes in the USA.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
You are wrong on several levels.
First, I think they are you are assuming they quit a job and become unemployed. The people in question are in HIGH demand. The question is not quit and get unemployment checks, but instead, quit and start your own company as CEO.
Second. It is not about not agreeing with law enforcement, that is your particular fantasy about what is going on. Instead it is quit because they believe that DOJ is violating the Constitution of the United States of America. People that really, truly think the government is about the violate the Constitution really will quit their jobs. This is in direct contradiction to the tin-foil idiots that think the DOJ has already violated the Constitution but have done nothing but post stupid comments.
Your belief that people have no principles reflects your personal mental foibles, not those of the rest of the world. They are not trying to fool anyone, they don't give a crap about what you or the general public cares about.
Also, Demi-gods no longer need money and do it for the principle/love.
Finally, there is nothing magical about Apple. If their best, most devoted, principled employees quit, the next "Jesus-phone" as you put it, will be a piece of crap and fail. Worse, remember who I said they would start their own company? The new Apple failure phone would have to compete with the new products created by the old employees, who quite likely would base their corporation in Vancouver, Canada in order to avoid the FBI issues. Wonderful city, still on the west coast, everyone speaks English.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley, just because they do not agree with the law enforcement. Maybe 1 or 2 people with some screws loose upstairs, but no sane person would do such a thing.
The Founding Fathers of our country abandoned their cushy plantations so they could fight for their liberties. Giving up one comfy job out of principle doesn't seem so bad in perspective.
Yes, it certainly seems that way. Unlike in some other cases, this time the government is doing everything "by the book" FBI do have a proper warrant and all of the backing of the Judiciary, that the 4th Amendment may require. Apple's continuing resistance can only be explained by either utter legal illiteracy or desire for publicity.
Considering the sheer size of the multi-billion dollar corporation, we can dispense with the former option...
Are you kidding me? You think the DOJ either forcing Apple to write malware to compromise their customers' security, or demanding their security signing keys, is "by the book" and in line with the Constitution?
And I'm sure there were people who would have lynched Rosa Parks if given the chance too. Just because you side with the bad guys on bad laws doesn't change the fact that civil disobedience can be a positive trait.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
And no one in the history of everything has ever left a job, taken a job somewhere else, and then been hired back at their previous job at a higher rate of pay after things changed. Ever. Never gonna happen.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley, just because they do not agree with the law enforcement. Maybe 1 or 2 people with some screws loose upstairs, but no sane person would do such a thing.
Considering your integrity to be more important than your job -- even when you can easily get another just as good -- is insane. Got it.
You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
If only you were around to explain this to Rosa Parks.
Let's ask snowden about civil disobedience when he gets home. I think he said he might be running a little late.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
I have a feeling that Apple would be quite happy to re-hire these folks with a different title that grants no access to the appropriate source code.
- "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
Except that surrenders the legal precedent whereby law enforcement can demand you write a program to compromise your product's security.
I prefer the current system where computer manufacturers install crapware without being compelled to do so.
If they hand over the source code or weaken the phone its not 'Apple' anymore. Thats the entire point.
Good-bye
Is that all, folks?
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
People value security and safety over privacy every single time.
This very comment section refutes your claim.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
We need more skills than working on consumer and fashion devices.
The fact you think that;s all Apple does assures me your company would be terrible to work for.
I don't like Microsoft either but I can still have respect for people that work there and the interesting things they work on. Apple is working on language design, chip design, obviously hardware design, and cutting edge advancements in UI on both desktop and mobile, not to mention possibly cars and VR... if you do't need any of those skills you must work at the most boring place on earth.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Constitution does not prevent the Executive from searching citizens. It requires the Executive's cause to be reasonable and approved by the Judiciary's. The requirements the Executive have satisfied in this case.
You are tragically misinformed. Nobody is stopping the DOJ from searching the phone. The problem they are facing is that the data on the phone is encrypted. To circumvent that matter, the DOJ is asking Apple either compromise their own customers' security by making malware, or giving their security keys to the DOJ so they can do the same. That is a violation of Apple's free speech and essentially enslavery.
Both options would've sounded phantastical to the framers of the Constitution, but they are quite analogous to, for example, demanding a landlord's cooperation in opening up a tenant's apartment, or a bank required to open up a customer's safe deposit box.
Those aren't analogous at all, since the landlord and bank have the keys to the doors they are being asked to open. What is more analogous would be if a criminal buried his locked box somewhere, so the U.S. government demanded all shovel owners and shovel manufacturers to start digging for it, or be in contempt of the court.
Actually, as much as I hate to say this, I think I kind of agree with what is being said. The FBI is merely demanding that someone help them execute a legal warrant, and Apple is refusing to do so. For good reasons, I might add, but I could see how the FBI might have a valid argument there.
However, the real story here is not that Apple could be forced to do this, it is that Apple *can* be forced to do this because they can force a download of an OS to a customer device. In other words, Apple has the master key to the apartment, because they made it that way. The FBI is merely demanding that they use it.
There is no question of *changing* iOS to allow the FBI to do this. iOS already allows this by *design*. It's just a matter of changing the payload.
I'm with Apple on this whole mess but this "leak" is a PR move. Apple usually doesn't let their engineers talk about what they ate for lunch let alone matters such as this.
Sabatage
Agree to help, but at every turn undermine the effort with obscure bugs.
"Oh, you went through every possible combination and it still didn't unlock? Silly me, it was just recycling the first ten attempts the whole time. My bad!".
You could probably string along the FBI indefinitely.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What law? The All Writs Act has never been used to order a company to write code for the FBI. In fact, CALEA which was debated by Congress two decades ago specifically took up this question and said it would not do so. The FBI trying to force a company to do by court order which Congress chose not to do by legislation is not legally sound.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Oh fuck off, it is not slavery in any fashion
That is correct Comrade. In the People's lands, we use gentle euphemisms like "forced labor."
Not sure about safe-deposit boxes, but many landlords do use master-keys, which can open all apartments in their building. Their cooperation in opening up a particular apartment may still be legally demanded by the police (and backed by a court order) — nothing outrageous here.
That is a false analogy. Apple doesn't have a key to the iPhone.
Unfortunately, it is also true that despite protests to the contrary, acquiescing to the FBI request this time, if it is indeed possible, would both open the way for the FBI and other agencies to request this in the future forever, and force Apple and others to ask this question -
Do I want to sell a product with encryption that cannot be circumvented?
Well, do they? DO we have a right to be secure in our possessions, to not be forced to incriminate ourselves by being forced to provide documents, messages, conversations, or merely to permit access to these, or do we have the right to not cooperate with an investigation and prosecution of ourselves?
Well, do we?
And can Apple sell products that include encryption that cannot be subverted? Notice I do not specify that this subversion be limited to government, but there is no method, resource, or force the government can exert that another determined and capable individual or group also cannot employ. That includes money or force.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Just because an agency claims it, and a court agrees, and appeals ultimately fail at the highest court, doesn't make it true. It merely makes it legal.
Which is why appointing SCOTUS Justices is more important than and transcends presidential elections. They are above review, short of impeachment, and collectively exert both absolute power and defy review and correction.
Try impeaching one Justice, very difficult. Impeaching two, who could drive the Court in any direction they wish, exceedingly difficult.
Impeaching three to break a cabal? Ha. An Article Five convention would be easier.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
You think the DOJ either forcing Apple to write malware to compromise their customers' security, or demanding their security signing keys, is "by the book" and in line with the Constitution?
The second half clearly is allowed, if they pay for it. Problem is, what is the Apple firmware signing key worth? $500 Billion? Something more than DoJ can pay, to be sure. Constitutional problems over takings come down to the requirement to pay for what is taken. Generally, for a company to buy that item they would have to buy the whole company. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that if they want something not for sale, they would have to buy the business to get it. If they government wants to nationalize Apple, they're allowed to take all the stock and pay market rate.
The first part isn't really clear in the general case, Constitutionally, because is that a taking or not? Unclear. But given the damage that it would do to Apple's speech, their intended PR that is their own prerogative, it would likely need to also cost many many billions of dollars. But with a communication device specifically, we don't have to worry about the Constitution, because the CALEA statute addresses this directly and the government is forbidden from asking for modifications of devices or systems.
Who cares if they can prove it, or have any evidence. Most of the people at Gitmo have been there for more than 13 years without charge or trial, let alone any evidence against them.
The hand-wavy idea that understanding the meaning of what you found in a search is part of the search is rather silly. I don't expect the SCOTUS to be impressed by that, though clearly at least a percentage of Magistrates are.
Nobody doubts that the DoJ has the right to demand that the County Health Department turn over their private encryption keys. The problem is, the owner of the phone (the health department) didn't store the device keys anywhere other than on the device. The only copies of the key are already in the FBI's possession.
Just like, if the safe key was melted down for scrap, then their might not be anything that the government has left to compel. Under CALEA, they explicitly cannot ask for modifications of a communication device.
Yep, the AC was unjustly modded. But it's an old comment, made by many people, including me, since the story first broke. It will take another person like Snowden to reveal to us and confirm that the FBI already has what it wants.
I'm likely to be better with a Kalashnikov, than you
Gotta love you armchair rebels... And Kalashnikov? Not very patriotic of you.. And you seem to completely miss the point.
Apple is legally required to help the government exploit the vulnerability
No, they are not. And hopefully they never will help. Now, if you want to go all fascist on them, be my guest. Just don't try to convince people that your government is better than any other tin pot dictatorship on the planet. And maybe that doesn't matter to you anyway, with the way you so zealously appeal to authority. I'm looking for a way to render it harmless, to remove its impunity. Man's law is fickle and capricious. The only relevant laws are the laws of physics. Only through those laws are my rights protected, and violated. Age old game of cat and mouse.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Let's ask snowden about civil disobedience when he gets home. I think he said he might be running a little late.
It's a common misconception that civil disobedience requires throwing yourself into the wood chipper that is our "justice" system. It does not.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Oh fuck off, it is not slavery in any fashion
Come mow my lawn, for free (because we might find terrorists hiding in the tall grass), or I'll have you kidnapped and locked in a cage until you agree to do so.
How, exactly, does that differ from slavery?
Most of the Fox people are very much on Apple's side and might actually applaud some engineer who did that. I know, it's odd, isn't it? I've taken to spending a few hours a week listening to Fox New Radio - it's a long story as to why. But, yeah, they came out on Apple's side right at the very start - like on day one. I was kind of surprised.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Even if the original binaries they hand the FBI are locked to that particular iphone there is no reason to believe the FBI won't eventually reverse engineer that lock so they can use it on all iphones of the same generation.
Actually, as much as I hate to say this, I think I kind of agree with what is being said. The FBI is merely demanding that someone help them execute a legal warrant, and Apple is refusing to do so. For good reasons, I might add, but I could see how the FBI might have a valid argument there.
Previous courts have ruled on what "helping" means especially on 3rd parties. The "undue burden" principle is often cited in that the government can ask for assistance but what is asks is limited in scope. For example if the police think someone else has buried bodies on your property, it can get a warrant to search your property. What it cannot do is force you to do the digging. Also it cannot effectively destroy your house while digging underneath it.
However, the real story here is not that Apple could be forced to do this, it is that Apple *can* be forced to do this because they can force a download of an OS to a customer device. In other words, Apple has the master key to the apartment, because they made it that way. The FBI is merely demanding that they use it.
No, Apple explicitly stated that it does not have the master key to an apartment in your analogy as it is wrong. First of all, Apple does not own the apartment nor leases it to the tenant. In this suit, Apple is a third party more akin to a door lock company that sold a door lock to a homeowner years ago (a lock in which the owner can and has changed the key). Apple does not have the key. It did however build a lock to defeat common lock-picking methods. What the FBI is asking Apple to do is to trick the owner into installing a new lock which is substantially easier to lock-pick.
There is no question of *changing* iOS to allow the FBI to do this. iOS already allows this by *design*. It's just a matter of changing the payload.
There is no question in that Apple may technically do what the FBI asks. The question is whether Apple should be forced to do so. In my analogy if a locksmith refuses to break into a house for the government, can the courts order him to do so? I think there are many precedents that say the government cannot force a third party to work for them.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
The entire "anti-establishment" premise of the summary is wrong. It is not anti-establishment for security professionals to refuse to break security.
It is professionally responsible. It's like if a priest is ordered to convert a parishioner to satanism, a doctor is ordered to harm a patient, or a cop is ordered to beat the crap out of an old lady.
They should really just relocate their head-office to another country in which they already operate.
And take any developers that want to live overseas someplace.
I say have them set up a development centre in THailand, or the Philippines, and then with the influx of Apple Money, the developers, and their families will be living like wealthy estate owners, complete with house-workers, at a fraction of their current Bay Area living expenses.
They would lose the American Tax loophole, which exists because most countries charge taxes based on where management is located, to avoid what the US does: charges taxes based on region incorporated.
Thus, new tech boom begins in Asia, Massive gentrification, and infrastructure improvements paid for by private companies.
It'd be a Republican's dream.
And as a side-effect, would create a new middle class in the area due to the sudden creation of service economies; and raise wealth due to the influx of US$ (or whatever currency they would use to pay employees)
I would relocate if they gave me the option to (and keep my CA salary)