Slashdot Mirror


Apple's Fight With US Over Privacy Enters a New Round (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on Bloomberg: Apple Inc.'s fight over privacy with the U.S. isn't over yet, even after the government dropped a demand for the company's help in accessing a California shooter's iPhone because someone else found a way to crack it. The U.S. said it'll keep fighting to get the company's help in getting data off a phone in Brooklyn, New York, that belonged to a drug dealer because Apple provided assistance in accessing such devices earlier. In a court filing Friday, the government said it's going ahead with an appeal of a judge's order denying its request for Apple's help. The battle between the world's most valuable tech company and the U.S. over encryption and data privacy has sparked a national debate, with dozens of companies and organizations siding with Apple, while law enforcement has generally taken the government's side.

62 comments

  1. And the viral AD campaign... by fbobraga · · Score: 0

    ... continues!

    1. Re:And the viral AD campaign... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Viral Active Directory?

    2. Re:And the viral AD campaign... by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      advertisement :P

  2. Well... by MitchDev · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. all politicians and LEOs can turn over all their private communications and information FIRST...

    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Laws don't apply to LEOs and politicians already enjoy a reality-distortion field that shields them from all legal consequences unless a higher level politician attacks them. Combine this with the fact that we have so many laws that practically every citizen breaks one or more of them each day with the increasing amounts of warrantless mass surveillance and you have a recipe for modern feudalism. Instead of owning land and having titles, today's lords are LEOs, government officials or politicians, and they can fuck up your life on a whim in order to enforce their power.

    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are drug dealers or terrorists, then yes, they should

    3. Re:Well... by malditaenvidia · · Score: 1

      politicians already enjoy a reality-distortion field that shields them from all legal consequences

      I guess... I guess they're not so different from apple after all.

    4. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I love living in a country where you are stripped of all your rights when accused of a crime! Isn't it great?

    5. Re: Well... by net28573 · · Score: 1

      I do not welcome our old corporate overlords.

      --
      RIP TRICERATOPS, YOU NEVER EXISTED
    6. Re:Well... by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      It's a wonder we don;t have more home-grown terrorists in this country since the system of checks and balances in terms of people vs. politicians is utter trash

  3. hoo boy this article. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple provided assistance in accessing such devices earlier.

    this took place largely through secret FISA court orders and wasnt a huge problem until the FBI pulled the wig off the fat lady. Apple would love to continue secretly unlocking phones, but its no longer an option when americas darling tech company has been directly implicated in bed with the US intelligence community. the biggest threat to the cloud based sharing model of internetworked gadgets and services that companies like Apple offer is the inability to keep the devices secure and away from prying eyes. It doesnt matter how many surveys come out declaring $countrymen dont care about privacy, the proof is in the pudding. Apple understands losing this mark of privacy could mean the death of the brands top sellers.

    the government said it's going ahead with an appeal of a judge's order denying its request for Apple's help.

    thats fine. thats how bureaucracy and legal processes work. this is a win for everyone because it didnt happen in a secret court.

    The battle between the world's most valuable tech company and the U.S. over encryption and data privacy has sparked a national debate

    theres no debate. the government wanted apple to cave in and erode the first amendment by unlocking a dead mans phone to prove a case that was already solved. this effort was very transparent to anyone paying even cursory attention. Apple fought back with a powerful attorney and in order to avoid setting a precedent for losing a first amendment case, the government pulled the legislative equivalent of a teenager scoffing and mumbling what-ever under her breath.

    with dozens of companies and organizations siding with Apple

    correction, with google pussy-footing in under pressure and other companies wringing their hands like spinsters at a bar fight. the only real opposition other than Apple was the FSF.

    there is no new round. Whatever chicanery the government used to crack the phone has now been its own killing blow. Apple will do as the borg, and in a few iterations of IOS you'll soon see a phone that is not only unsucceptable to the present exploit, but cannot become succeptable to third party intervention without the sand of brute force time.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:hoo boy this article. by wardrich86 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I really wish Google would man up and fight along with Apple on this one.

    2. Re:hoo boy this article. by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Apple provided assistance in accessing such devices earlier.

      this took place largely through secret FISA court orders and wasnt a huge problem until the FBI pulled the wig off the fat lady. Apple would love to continue secretly unlocking phones, but its no longer an option when americas darling tech company has been directly implicated in bed with the US intelligence community. the biggest threat to the cloud based sharing model of internetworked gadgets and services that companies like Apple offer is the inability to keep the devices secure and away from prying eyes. It doesnt matter how many surveys come out declaring $countrymen dont care about privacy, the proof is in the pudding. Apple understands losing this mark of privacy could mean the death of the brands top sellers.

      Actually, Apple also stopped providing decryption services when iOS 8 was released that cranked up the encryption usage and made even less stuff accessible.

      Because it's almost impossible to tell which version of iOS is running and Apple knows they can't break into an iOS 8 and above phone. Explaining to LEOs why one phone can be decrypted but another can't is an exercise in futility, and it's quite likely Apple will try and fail after having spent a week attempting it only to discover it was updated to the latest iOS.

    3. Re:hoo boy this article. by PPH · · Score: 5, Interesting

      this took place largely through secret FISA court orders and wasnt a huge problem until the FBI pulled the wig off the fat lady. Apple would love to continue secretly unlocking phones,

      It's possible that the straw which broke the camel's back was the FBI's request for Apple to write a cracking tool. Rather than unlocking phones for them one at a time. With the tool, the FBI could go into the business of cracking phones themselves, no warrant (secret court or otherwise) needed.

      Furthermore, a sly DoJ lawyer could make an argument that, once the FBI has been provided with such a tool, any attempt by Apple to improve phone security could be interpreted as interfering with law enforcement if the tool ceased to work. Once you give the FBI a capability, it will be hell taking it back.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You actually think that you need the encryption key to get the data off the phone? That's cute. If the phone is on, then the data has already been decrypted and the key is no longer needed. As long as you can access the filesystem through an OS bug, you simply use standard read-file (or even write-file!) to access the contents and completely bypass the lock-screen. Even if they can only access the encrypted filesystem, they can still get the key and encrypted filesystem off for brute-forcing purposes (10,000 combination PIN is easy to do)

      To be fair, this only really impacts them. For those paranoid or sensitive about government intervention, everyone else can simply install an app and have seamless cloud integration outside the US. Absolutely nobody needs to worry about the government forcing them to ban apps that circumvent the government demands. Even if it happens with all other platforms, any user can simply download it from a website. And before you say "but I can install any app I want!" defending APL - that's not true, you still need the dev certificate which can be revoked at any time, bricking that app.

      The same reason why ISIS chose Android to develop and try to put their app on? It's the same reasons why those who care about freedom choose other platforms. It's hilarious to see US citizens and ISIL/ISIS fighting for the same thing. =P

    5. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except of course that the write required no such thing. The writ was specifically written so that Apple could maintain control of any software written, and in fact did not actually require software be written. Apple had many options, and they chose to hypocritically advertise the iPhone as a tool for criminals, when they've already clearly caved on the same demand to the Chinese government.

    6. Re:hoo boy this article. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Unauthorized encryption keys and methods will be illegal. As-side from grandfathering in existing tech, we will see a standard in which the Gov has complete access to the device - BY LAW! Eventually other nations will demand the same level of access. Thus a GOV API will be created around the OS in which each nation is given their own key.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    7. Re:hoo boy this article. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      google does not, and never had (and likely never will) stand for 'privacy' or security.

      apple can con us into thinking that they care about this (and in many ways, they really do) - but google makes no money from the concept of user privacy. its laughable once you think about it. if google seriously tried to tell us NOW that they care about our privacy, we'd have a great big laugh. maybe a year after they were founded and many of us believe the 'do no evil' motto; but now, its 100% eroded and we see the emperor and his lack of clothing.

      apple still has some semblance of user privacy as their selling point.

      who else does?

      more importantly, who else is RICH ENOUGH to withstand the economic pressure that the government would inflict on any company less than apple's level of might, who dares deny papa his due data.

      just like there is no free press anymore in popular media; the media will never call the government out on any hardball issues for fear of being cutoff from future interviews or even worse. they are all running scared and so they 'play ball' with the gov and do as they are told. now, 100% worthless. we have no honest reporting left in popular media, in the US.

      this is what happens when you let a corrupt government get so powerful, only the richest company in the world would dare to go against them, and its only because their crown jewels (iphone) is at stake.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    8. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I write a piece of software that tells you where any person was yesterday at noon JUST for one missing persons case, you would be a fool if you did not think they would come to me every 5 minutes to get info on someone new. Before long it wouldn't just be missing people, it would be anyone who had crossed anyone in power.

      We both KNOW thats what would happen. Quit playing otherwise.

    9. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why did it take so long for the tech community to figure out that Google was just another company? Why did we EVER believe that "don't be evil" crap? Are we that stupid that marketing just needs to use a few words that resonate with us to turn is into sheep who are just as gullible as vacuous women calling for L'Oreal ads?

    10. Re: hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, of course, that here doing it either on demand or have given the software to the Chinese government. Kind of blows a hole in your argument.

    11. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking stupid?!?!?!
      Law Enforcement *IS* the Government.
      They do *NOT* take any side other than the *Governments* side... meaning AGAINST YOU, ALWAYS!!!
      This is also why you NEVER see cops convicted of traffic violations like turn signals, headlights, etc... or convicted of murder....
      Because THEY'RE THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT.
      Never Talk To Cops.
      And fuck them all.

    12. Re:hoo boy this article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because, when Google has had the chance to get away with "evil" stuff, many many times it has chosen the less evil way. They have chosen standard over proprietary many times. They have chosen open protocols and open source many times, and released much of their own development when they didn't have to. In general, they genuinely seem to want to make the world a better place - a lot more than they have to. They could be much more selfish and make as much or more money - but they choose to cooperate and give back. Yes they sometimes do things to piss people off, but overall, they are much less "evil" than probably most other companies. It's obvious that they don't just do everything they can legally get away with every time.

    13. Re:hoo boy this article. by Onthax · · Score: 1

      Apple stopped decrypting phones. They still provide all your data that has synced to the cloud to anyone who asks. It's just a small subset of cases where they need the phone, not just cloud.

  4. Leaving by wulfmans · · Score: 1

    So when is Apple going to just move over seas to a place that is not so fucked up?. Hell they have enough cash to buy a small country.

    1. Re:Leaving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Can you name the less fucked up country they should move to?

      (hint: all countries are fucked up one way or another.)

    2. Re:Leaving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've moved production to China and are either cracking iPhones for the Chinese government or have given the tools to the Chinese government.

    3. Re:Leaving by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

      Iceland after the next election?

  5. What about Android? by harperska · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why do we never hear stories about Google fighting the FBI to protect Android users' privacy and right to encryption? Is it because Google is complacent with the government, or is it because Android phones are so easy to crack that the FBI doesn't even bother to ask?

    1. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do we never hear stories about Google fighting the FBI to protect Android users' privacy and right to encryption? Is it because Google is complacent with the government, or is it because Android phones are so easy to crack that the FBI doesn't even bother to ask?

      Because android phones are ridiculously easy to break into without any help.

    2. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      There is a good reason they renamed their parent company Alphabet. Get it? Alphabet organizations.

    3. Re:What about Android? by malditaenvidia · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because google even pretending to fight for privacy would be hilariously hypocritical.

    4. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is a good reason they renamed their parent company Alphabet. Get it?

      So they can be listed alphabetically before Apple?

    5. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's because criminals know that Apple phones are higher quality and only ever use iPhones.

    6. Re:What about Android? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      All the user can reflect on is PRISM years and the lack of public or court comment and internal gov access....
      If the hardware is in gov hands?
      If the hardware is still been used in the wild and data is been entered and displayed via a fancy user installed software "app" encryption layer?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:What about Android? by formfeed · · Score: 1

      Because google even pretending to fight for privacy would be hilariously hypocritical.

      Of course they fight for privacy.
      Except that they call it "mining rights".

    8. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has more to do with the fact that there are many Android manufacturers, so they would probably be asking Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, Fujitsu, Sharp, HTC, etc., etc. instead of Google directly.

      Also, Most android phones in circulation now don't have full disk encryption enabled by default, and so most of the data is stored unencrypted. When Full Disk Encryption is enabled by default (like on the nexus), there is pretty much zero chance of breaking in - you just have to brute force the password and hope it is simple and short.

    9. Re:What about Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no more so than Apple, what drugs are you guys on seriously?

  6. Sparked a "debate"? Why? by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    There should be no debate. The state has no right to compel "assistance", any more than it has for a confession, from anybody outside its own employees, politicians, military, bureaucrats, etc.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      actually, the State does. It is law in many countries. It is also law in the USA if a 'National Security' issue is at stake. Literally federal marshalls can come in and sit behind you at your desk with guns at your head and 'make' you perform... Shoot you if you do not.

      You may want to look it up.

    2. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, under the guise of *might makes right* the state can do what it wants. The problem from our end is submission and obedience.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by tattood · · Score: 2

      Literally federal marshalls can come in and sit behind you at your desk with guns at your head and 'make' you perform... Shoot you if you do not.

      You may want to look it up.

      [citation needed]

      --
      WTB [sig], PST!!!
    4. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of coarse, as an application of the first three specifically enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights, I can point my own gun at them and say "get the hell out of my house".

    5. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by halivar · · Score: 1

      This shouldn't be necessary, but [citation needed].

    6. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by fuzznutz · · Score: 1

      actually, the State does. It is law in many countries. It is also law in the USA if a 'National Security' issue is at stake. Literally federal marshalls can come in and sit behind you at your desk with guns at your head and 'make' you perform... Shoot you if you do not.

      You may want to look it up.

      WTF? Why don't you just point out the law that gives Federal Marshals the power to summarily execute citizens for failure to perform and ordered task. I'm calling bullshit.

    7. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone's been watching too much '24'...

    8. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Put it this way... It may not be technically legal, I don't know, but there are historic examples of essentially that kind of thing happening. And the marshals were neither fired nor disciplined. (There may also be examples where they were fired, of course.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's called "suicide by cop", the bright side being that all your problems are solved.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    10. Re:Sparked a "debate"? Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you might want to look it up. At least in US and Japan this would certainly not be legal.

  7. Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple should find a face-saving way of caving in. It's either that or being publicly defeated. You cannot fight the US government, not in this day and age, and not expect to be crushed. Apple may believe its corporate status can shield it from the might of the State but openly defying the government is simply foolish. Had they not thrown that charade about "privacy" that the general public does not care about, they could have reached an agreement in secret and gotten away, but they stood their ground. Ill-advised in the extreme. The next years will see a crackdown over the internet that nobody ever thought could be possible. A word of advice: if anyone out there is developing cryptographic or anonymizing tools, stop right now and delete all your work. It will be used as evidence against you. It's not "shilling" or anything naive minds might think. It's simply being practical.

    1. Re:Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple should find a face-saving way of caving in. It's either that or being publicly defeated.

      Huh? Apple was kicking the FBI's ass in court. The FBI pulled their case because they knew they were going to lose.

      You cannot fight the US government, not in this day and age, and not expect to be crushed. Apple may believe its corporate status can shield it from the might of the State but openly defying the government is simply foolish. Had they not thrown that charade about "privacy" that the general public does not care about, they could have reached an agreement in secret and gotten away, but they stood their ground. Ill-advised in the extreme. The next years will see a crackdown over the internet that nobody ever thought could be possible. A word of advice: if anyone out there is developing cryptographic or anonymizing tools, stop right now and delete all your work. It will be used as evidence against you. It's not "shilling" or anything naive minds might think. It's simply being practical.

      Well, you sure as hell cannot fight the US government. Good thing we have people who can.

  8. Fair pay by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    It is more like Apple 's fight to be paid for selling out customers and their data. Citizen4 already showed the Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and others were being paid by the US taxpayer to sell out their customer base in NSA PRISM.

    1. Re:Fair pay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would still be a good thing. I mean if the government has to pay an expensive fee every time, they would at least target those they think actually likely to be guilty instead of "Well since it's free let's just ask for all of it"

  9. Waiting for the TPP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for tha passage of the TPP so Apple can sue the US Government for the 'damages' to it's business caused by being forced to 'unlock' iPhones using the provisoins of the TPP that allow for business governement dispute resolutions in the oh so business friendly private 'courts' of the TPP.

    1. Re:Waiting for the TPP by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Mod the parent up!!

      It probably wouldn't happen though, because the US has a history of ignoring treaty obligations, while insisting that others honor them.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  10. I believe I have a right to fully encrypt my... by hawleyg · · Score: 1

    I believe I have a right to take and fully encrypt my dick pics without worry of a backdoor into my privacy.

    Give me Liberty!

    --
    Cheers, Glen
  11. But the notch on a prosecutor's belt! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    They should require escrow keys -- after all, it is far more important to catch a drug lord than risk falling down into permanent panopticon 1984 tyranny, with a boot on a human face, forever.

    Well, we know the US will never fall because history shows, wait, it doesn't show shit about democracies falling, in fact it shows they always do.

    But even if it doesn't, China and Russia won't abuse the exact same power. Wait, they already do. Well, sux2b them.

    But it is worth the risk to catch a drug lord, so let's risk all future freedom for all eternity by letting government put their hands in our underpants at will.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  12. Encryption: No More Secrets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way to fight Apple, Google et al. is to make Encryption, a Capital Offense, punishable by means up to and including the Death Penalty!

    So, if "Mr." Timothy Donald Cook wants to be a Queer, in solitary lock-up, then there is a cell sized just for him. :-)

    Ha ha

  13. Apple vs U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would rather see tech companies help than let the feds develop a solution they can use freely. And you know once the magic algorithm to crack the encryption exists it will inevitably go wild. If apple would provide a recovery service it controls it might slow down the mass breaching of data that is surely coming.