Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums
   
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )Resend Validation Email

DJ Panel ( Server Stats )   Song History   Initial D World Chat Room (IRC)   Broadband Stream
RADIO BROADCAST » streaming at 96kbps with 9 unique listeners, playing m.o.v.e - Dogfight

       

  Important Rules
• Do not post any obscene material. (i.e. - nudity, explicit graphic situations ... etc.)
• Put a viewer discretion somewhere in your topic title / description when posting topic(s) that others might find offensive. (i.e. - Not Work Safe, PG13 ... etc.)

» FORUM MODERATOR : FORUM MODERATOR

3 Pages  1 2 3  ( Go to first unread post )

Views: 4,030  ·  Replies: 54 
> Apple vs FBI over unlocking iphones, What's your take on it?
APX
    Posted: Feb 18 2016, 12:19 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,162
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE
But behind the scenes, relations were tense, as lawyers for the Obama administration and Apple held closely guarded discussions for over two months about one particularly urgent case: The F.B.I. wanted Apple to help “unlock” an iPhone used by one of the two attackers who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, Calif., in December, but Apple was resisting.

When the talks collapsed, a federal magistrate judge, at the Justice Department’s request, ordered Apple to bypass security functions on the phone. The order set off a furious public battle on Wednesday between the Obama administration and one of the world’s most valuable companies in a dispute with far-reaching legal implications.

“This Apple case really goes right to the heart of the encryption issue,” said Ira Rubinstein, a senior fellow at the New York University Information Law Institute, “and in some ways, this was a fight that was inevitable.”


Read more here!

What's your thoughts/opinions about this?
It's a mixed bag mostly for people, they want them to open it up to possibly help prevent future terrorist attacks on the states, but this also means the FBI/Government can hack into your phone at anytime and look over your activity if this battle loses for apple. The news have been playing this almost every half hour or so once I came home.

Sorta reminds me of the whole bush presidency and the new acts that went on spying on possible terrorists, everybody hated that shit.
Tessou
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 03:04 AM


Commandant of IDW
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,033
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





It's double edged. Always has been. NSA could benefit vastly from mass intelligence gathering, but that comes with the caveat of having access to millions of people's data.

The question was asked during the shooting: "could NSA/FBI/CIA have prevented this if it was legal?"

Enjoy answering that one. We failed to answer adequately enough, because it's difficult to sell the public on "it's for your fucking safety" when they're pissed off that we might have been looking at their banal goddamn sexts on their phone. PROTIP: Didn't happen, but thanks for caring.
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
xiao
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 04:10 AM


moon★bunny
Group Icon

Group: TRAP CLUB
Posts: 3,819
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location: C Boutique





Government should worry about giving free 600 dollar phones to everyone, and stop wasting money on stupid junk like criminal's sex-chats as Tess mentioned.

Phone companies should stop worrying about the government and start making non-laggy phones that don't suck because of all the preinstalled bloatware that grinds your phone to a screeching bleep.

Both parties suck... let's put those hands together and make something that doesn't; like Dolph Lundgren. awesome.gif
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 08:19 AM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





This is the easiest thing to answer ever, I don't know what Tessou's problem is. Ready?

There is no such thing as "just a backdoor that only the ____ can use with a court order" to encryption. Period. If you insert an intentional flaw into encryption it ceases to be effective encryption. It begins to be a way for anyone else to use the same backdoor.

So either you have effective encryption or you do not. I, personally, am on the side of effective encryption. Anyone on the side of a backdoor either has no understanding of the technology whatsoever or doesn't want encryption.
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
APX
  Posted: Feb 18 2016, 08:40 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,162
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Also begs to think about this: What happens when apple is forced to break it and hackers from other countries jump in on it?
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 09:23 AM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





That's the whole point. There is no such thing as a my-use-only backdoor to encryption. There is only flawed encryption and flawless encryption.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
APX
  Posted: Feb 18 2016, 09:46 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,162
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Looks like android is backing apple up on this. I'm sure this will be a hot topic for the candidates.
Tessou
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 01:36 PM


Commandant of IDW
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,033
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE (Nomake Wan @ 5 hours, 16 minutes ago)
This is the easiest thing to answer ever, I don't know what Tessou's problem is. Ready?

There is no such thing as "just a backdoor that only the ____ can use with a court order" to encryption. Period. If you insert an intentional flaw into encryption it ceases to be effective encryption. It begins to be a way for anyone else to use the same backdoor.

So either you have effective encryption or you do not. I, personally, am on the side of effective encryption. Anyone on the side of a backdoor either has no understanding of the technology whatsoever or doesn't want encryption.

You're looking it from a functional "how do they do it?" perspective. I'm looking at it as a moral compass quandary, as this has quickly become a political fulcrum in the national media. We're seeing it from different perspectives, that's all.

HOW THEY DO IT is unimportant to my question. We used to have agreements with manufacturers and developers in the years of the Patriot Act that allowed this shit all the time. I didn't care how they did it, I just cared that they worked, because it meant I and everybody else at GRSOC could do our jobs. I've detailed a few times why the Patriot Act was good for intelligence. Thanks to Snowden, the media was able to take the ball he threw and turn it into a hypothetical slippery slope argument to strike fear into the public of a worst case scenario that literally never happened in the history of the Patriot Act.

What baffles me is why the fuck the FBI of all agencies wants backdoor access to phones and was willing to risk a public trial over this. (EDIT: Nevermind, it was in relation to the California shooting so it's in their jurisdiction.) FBI, unlike the CIA, has a law enforcement arm and only handles domestic cases. This means they can't use the CIA or NSA's blanket international intelligence and defense capabilities to justify their "need to know".

This post has been edited by Tessou on Feb 18 2016, 01:58 PM
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
RalliKai
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 04:16 PM


Hunter of epic shades.
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,607
Joined: Oct 9th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Why not simply give the phone to Apple and have them unlock the information? Apple provides the data back to the FBI/NSA and does whatever to the phone afterwards (incinerate it, send it to space, whatever).

Frankly, I'm more on Tessou's side of this argument.
Tessou
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 04:41 PM


Commandant of IDW
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,033
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





Argument against Apple, or the nonexistent argument I have with N1?
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 06:33 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (RalliKai @ 2 hours, 17 minutes ago)
Why not simply give the phone to Apple and have them unlock the information? Apple provides the data back to the FBI/NSA and does whatever to the phone afterwards (incinerate it, send it to space, whatever).

Frankly, I'm more on Tessou's side of this argument.

Apple can't magically make the encryption go away. They designed it properly. What the FBI wants is for them to make a custom OS that can be flashed to the phone to bypass it. The problem being that if they make such a thing, well...that's the end of it. Apple used to comply with requests before encryption was default, but now that it is they're rightfully putting their foot down.

Some bad people use encryption, so we should ban it?

Some bad people use computers, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use the Internet, so we should ban it?

Some bad people use smartphones, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use guns, so we should ban them?

Some bad people drive cars, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use knives, so we should ban them?

This 'argument' is silly. I understand Tessou coming at it from a "just because we can [use encryption] doesn't mean we should" angle rather than the technical angle that I did, but my understanding of his angle does nothing to change my stance.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
RalliKai
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 09:16 PM


Hunter of epic shades.
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,607
Joined: Oct 9th 2004
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE (Tessou @ 4 hours, 35 minutes ago)
Argument against Apple, or the nonexistent argument I have with N1?

It was in regard to the benefit bulk collection brings to our intelligence gathering capabilities.

I wasn't familiar with iOS encryption standards outside of Apple switching to AES but having done some more research on it, I see what N1 is talking about.

This post has been edited by RalliKai on Feb 18 2016, 09:17 PM
Perry
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 09:21 PM


Like an eagle!
Group Icon

Group: SITE OWNER
Posts: 7,951
Member No.: 1
Joined: Sep 15th 2002
Location: San Leandro, California





I am really frustrated at the ignorance displayed by the people who don't understand the technical aspect of such software.

IT DOESN'T EXIST.

There is no "just give it to Apple and they can just unlock this phone" There is no algorithm in place to circumvent their own OS. You know you can set it so after three wrong attempts and all the data in the phone can be erased? Yeah, bruth force is out. The iPhone 5C that FBI wants unlocked is no different than millions of the other iPhones out there. Creating a software to circumvent the lock for only one phone is a ridiculous proposition. Once the algorithm to circumvent the lock is out, there is no way to stop people from reverse engineer it. And it will be a matter of time before every device can be unlocked.

You might as well ask Apple to close down their business.
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 18 2016, 10:19 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





Yeah, what they want done is a new OS that can be flashed without wiping the phone, one that isn't vulnerable to brute-force attacks against the passcode. But if you can flash an OS without wiping the phone, what's stopping you from just flashing an OS that automatically unlocks whatever phone it's flashed onto?

If it can be done, anyone can do it with enough effort.
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
xiao
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 12:44 AM


moon★bunny
Group Icon

Group: TRAP CLUB
Posts: 3,819
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location: C Boutique





This might require a bit of social engineering from Apple's PR department.

Namely erasing the whole phone and telling the FBI-monkeys at the Numb3rs Lab that...

"- oops! We accidentally erased the phone, tee-hee; Even if we were to create such a self-righteously suicidal algorithm, and impart the syntax upon your engineers to the detriment of our own finances...
- well, all the information's gone-- erased, vanished, dissolved and irrecoverably, intangibly, and ultimately insidiously elapsed.
- Move along Female Body Inspectors, information warfare is a slippery business. Oh, and one more thing FooBees; nobody better lay a finger on my butterfinger." whistling.gif

This post has been edited by xiao on Feb 19 2016, 01:05 AM
RalliKai
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 07:07 AM


Hunter of epic shades.
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,607
Joined: Oct 9th 2004
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE (Perry @ 9 hours, 45 minutes ago)
I am really frustrated at the ignorance displayed by the people who don't understand the technical aspect of such software.

IT DOESN'T EXIST.

The vast majority of people out there don't understand security beyond creating and inputting a password, let alone explaining something like symmetric key encryption or brute-force attack. I realize I should have studied more on what Apple has been doing in data security before jumping into the pool with that question.

Tessou
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 08:14 AM


Commandant of IDW
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,033
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE (Nomake Wan @ Yesterday, 10:33 PM)
Apple can't magically make the encryption go away. They designed it properly. What the FBI wants is for them to make a custom OS that can be flashed to the phone to bypass it. The problem being that if they make such a thing, well...that's the end of it. Apple used to comply with requests before encryption was default, but now that it is they're rightfully putting their foot down.

Some bad people use encryption, so we should ban it?

Some bad people use computers, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use the Internet, so we should ban it?

Some bad people use smartphones, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use guns, so we should ban them?

Some bad people drive cars, so we should ban them?

Some bad people use knives, so we should ban them?

This 'argument' is silly. I understand Tessou coming at it from a "just because we can [use encryption] doesn't mean we should" angle rather than the technical angle that I did, but my understanding of his angle does nothing to change my stance.

Please bear my children. If I could assign gold stars to posts, this would be one of them. biggrin.gif
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
APX
  Posted: Feb 19 2016, 08:45 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,162
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE
So here is my offer to the FBI. I will, free of charge, decrypt the information on the San Bernardino phone, with my team. We will primarily use social engineering, and it will take us three weeks. If you accept my offer, then you will not need to ask Apple to place a back door in its product, which will be the beginning of the end of America.

If you doubt my credentials, Google "cybersecurity legend" and see whose name is the only name that appears in the first 10 results out of more than a quarter of a million.


John McAfee say's he'll do it for free.


EEEEEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Not sure how I feel about this.
Tessou
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 01:35 PM


Commandant of IDW
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,033
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





My issue with McAfee's statement is that he's using the typical "slippery slope" argument to fear-shame people into rallying behind him. He sounds a lot like a Fox News anchor. "IT WILL BE THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF AMERICA!" Shuuuuuut the fuck up. America didn't explode under the Patriot Act. It won't end if Apple actually pulls their pants down and accepts the FBI's big black dick. It will set a bad precedent, but it's not going to be the flashpoint that kills the country and the people's trust in the government entirely. Let the GOP do that. Not Apple. laugh.gif
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
207
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 05:46 PM


39-54-369
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 6,188
Member No.: 16,670
Joined: Mar 16th 2006
Location: Montreal





i honestly dont mind the FBI handing the phones to apple so apple themselves can unlock the data and pass it off to the FBI. in this case apple will keep any program to get into the phones as propriety information and simply only pass along the data stored on the phone to the FBI. apple gets to keep the access platform to locked phones and the FBI gets the info.

when it comes to crimes, they authorities need access to the info locked on the phones. they just need to come to a compromise where the phone companies keep their proprietary access programs while protecting the other customers' data while passing off any pertinent info needed to investigate crimes to the proper authorities.

it does allow the possibility to get into the phones through reverse engineering should unscrupulous people figure out what Apple does to get into the locked phones. every technology has a positive and negative downsides to it

This post has been edited by 207 on Feb 19 2016, 05:47 PM
xiao
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 07:05 PM


moon★bunny
Group Icon

Group: TRAP CLUB
Posts: 3,819
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location: C Boutique





user posted image
Image size reduced, original size: 1600 x 1050. Click here to view the image in its original dimension.

Awwwwwwwwww shiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeee-- SONN!!11! awesome.gif
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 07:06 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (APX @ Today, 9:45 AM)

John McAfee say's he'll do it for free.


EEEEEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Not sure how I feel about this.

He also says he'll use 'social engineering' to do it. Last I checked the only people you could socially engineer to unlock the phone are both dead.

McAfee has been off his rocker for a long time now. He's talking huge but he doesn't have the ability to back it up.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
xiao
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 07:17 PM


moon★bunny
Group Icon

Group: TRAP CLUB
Posts: 3,819
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location: C Boutique





QUOTE (Nomake Wan @ 10 minutes, 23 seconds ago)
He also says he'll use 'social engineering' to do it. Last I checked the only people you could socially engineer to unlock the phone are both dead.

McAfee has been off his rocker for a long time now. He's talking huge but he doesn't have the ability to back it up.

Why's he running for office, did he spend all his money on TrueCrypt & Blow... unsure.gif??

Quite unusual for a tech-tycoon to get into politics; Gates has his charities and stuff, but programmers are usually have no need to spearhead a campaign. I mean Neo was The One, but he went about it a totally different route~ let the congressmen/cabinet/lawyer types run imo. derp.gif
APX
  Posted: Feb 19 2016, 09:45 PM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,162
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





I'm liking the new faces chime in on this topic, just wished more would rather than boost up the view count. sad.gif



QUOTE
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a motion on Friday seeking to compel Apple Inc (AAPL.O) to comply with a judge's order to unlock the encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, portraying the tech giant's refusal as a "marketing strategy."

In response, a senior Apple executive, speaking with reporters on condition of anonymity, characterized the Justice Department's filing as an effort to argue its case in the media before the company has a chance to respond.

The back and forth escalated a showdown between the Obama administration and Silicon Valley over security and privacy that ignited earlier this week.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is seeking the tech company's help to access shooter Syed Rizwan Farook's phone by disabling some of its passcode protections. The company so far has pushed back and on Thursday won three extra days to respond to the order.

Another senior Apple executive said Congress is the right place for a debate over encryption, not a courtroom.
QUOTE
Everybody is in a tizzy over whether Apple should comply with a court order to unlock the iPhone of one of the dead San Bernardino terrorists. But there’s one detail in this whole mess that’s completely bizarre. The terrorist’s employer, the San Bernardino Health Department, accidentally reset the guy’s iCloud password.

Technically, the iPhone in question (the one the FBI is demanding that Apple unlock) was purchased by the San Bernardino Department of Health. And as security researcher Christopher Soghoian has pointed out on Twitter, the Department tried to reset the phone’s iCloud password remotely in the hours after the attack. The department hoped to gain information from a possible back-up of the phone to iCloud. Instead, it rendered the account useless.

Interesting.


The fun just keeps on popping up.
Nomake Wan
Posted: Feb 19 2016, 10:16 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,066
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





Government agencies being utterly fucking useless? Who knew!? laugh2.gif
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project

3 Pages  1 2 3