The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Internet & Technology (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   News Apple refusing FBI's orders to unlock iPhone (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=363368)

Mawa February 17th, 2016 5:16 PM

Hum... I feel this can be a debate.

Listen, I'll won't take part in any of this. I don'T want to start a fight with Apple Lovers :p


Buuut..


I know privacy is really important. But National security is important too. I wonder if the government is gonna take time to search in someone's phone with no reason.

We already don't have any privacy on our phones. (Take a look of what the apps ask and all the stuff).

If the FBI has, for some reason, a warrant to check my phone, and I have nothing to hide, I'l show them, no?

But like I said, it is a debate. I am only exposing another side of view :)

donavannj February 17th, 2016 6:22 PM

More backdoors is the last thing we need in our devices and software. I applaud Apple for this decision. It won't make me switch to them, but it is, in my opinion the correct thing to do both from a PR standpoint and a doing right by the customer standpoint, since such a tool could be used very maliciously and would allow police bypass the processes that police agencies need to go through to get information from accounts, even for the simple petty pickpocket.

mew_nani February 17th, 2016 7:21 PM

Something I don't understand; couldn't they brute force their way into the device? Why do they need Apple to unlock it for them? iDevices are difficult to deal with and hack into but not impossible, and if it's just locked with a passcode can't they just guess their way in?

I get they need to get into the phone because it may contain contacts and such but lets face it; those contacts are probably public to some extent already. Everybody knows this guy was talking with known terror suspects and it's easy to find out where they are online.

mew_nani February 17th, 2016 8:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Fail (Post 9123316)
The problem is that there is an infinite amount of possible passwords for a device. If they attempt to bruteforce their way in, they run the risk of locking out the device for long periods of time, something they don't have much of.

In addition (I wasn't aware of this,) in newer versions of iOS, if the incorrect password is entered too many times, the device will wipe and reset itself to preserve the user's privacy. Because the data contained on the phone is literally a matter of national security, they can't run the risk of it being deleted.

Ah I see. That's an incredibly haphazard feature but I can see why they would need help. Still if in normal cases a phone can be tapped into to look for clues... eh I guess the problem isn't so much that the FBI is asking for Apple for help in this instance because it is legal to look at a suspect's phone as long as they have a warrant, but that they want Apple to make them a tool so they can just hack into any iDevice they wish. It's very concerning that they would use a terrorist's phone as leverage for a power grab of this magnitude.

Legendary Silke February 17th, 2016 9:21 PM

This is probably the kind of thing that we probably aren't really prepared for. When I look at this, it's basically one of these dilemmas that, well, there probably isn't a good solution. You don't want to set a dangerous precedent in any way...

Though I guess I think Apple is doing the right thing by refusing to backdoor.

mew_nani February 17th, 2016 9:51 PM

I figured Trump would be for forcing Apple to open it up. Guy's a blowhard and doesn't really think things through when he says them. A man with that level of arrogance and complete lack of understanding towards the implications this has is a dangerous man indeed as not only does he fail to understand how dangerous the FBI with a shiny new backdoor can be, but refuses to listen to reason as he seemingly can't understand the opposing point of view.

Pinkie-Dawn February 17th, 2016 9:55 PM

Did Apple also try to realize that their consumers may also be at risk from another terrorist attack, and that San Bernadino attacker's device may contain important evidence to track down these terrorists? Privacy is important, yes, but would you go so far to protect the identity of someone who may have a connection to the same people the government is trying to stop?

mew_nani February 17th, 2016 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123436)
Did Apple also try to realize that their consumers may also be at risk from another terrorist attack, and that San Bernadino attacker's device may contain important evidence to track down these terrorists? Privacy is important, yes, but would you go so far to protect the identity of someone who may have a connection to the same people the government is trying to stop?

It's important to stop terrorists, I agree, but forcing Apple to make a backdoor causes two problems. The first is that it establishes that a government agency, and by extension the government itself, can now just order a company do to something, whether it be creating a piece of software, or making a specific product, and can punish said company if they refuse to comply. Very communistic in nature. The second problem is that it puts a backdoor in that the FBI (and by extension the government, again) can abuse later to look into your private data on your iDevice whenever it wishes. I don't know if the FBI got a warrant for this, I'm assuming they did, but power breeds abuse and corruption, and it isn't like anyone is going to stop them if they just decide to start spying on you as you text to other people or play Angry Birds. After all we already know they were spying on phone calls illegally and nothing was done about it.

Pinkie-Dawn February 17th, 2016 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flight (Post 9123443)
Bolded statement is not Apple's job. Apple is a hardware/software manufacturer, and that's that. If Apple doesn't have the keys, then there's nothing the government can really do, and they should suck it up. It's a cruel reality, but Apple isn't willing to risk the millions of iOS users by making any sort of a backdoor, and I agree with that.

It kinda is, because no consumers = no money, and companies will only care if they're making less money. They don't want their current/future customers killed from a terrorist attack. This too is part of the cruel reality we live in, unless we wish to make it cruel than it is.

mew_nani February 17th, 2016 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123454)
It kinda is, because no consumers = no money, and companies will only care if they're making less money. They don't want their current/future customers killed from a terrorist attack. This too is part of the cruel reality we live in, unless we wish to make it cruel than it is.

You're talking about a manufacturing company, not a police force. By that logic Apple should also be responsible for all the people who got mugged and murdered over an iPhone because after all, no consumers = no money. Their job is to make things that make people feel happy. We already have several forces dedicated to keeping us safe, we don't need Apple joining in and giving away all our info in the process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Fail (Post 9123452)
Donald Trump is the kind of person that's "Open mouth, insert foot here" and doesn't understand just how technology (Or anything in general) works but talks anyway. Do remember that he said that he'd turn off the internet recently as if there's some kind of on/off switch.

I had no idea he said such a thing. Why do people support this guy?! I'm a conservative/libertarian and even I think the guy is bad news. He's as much a big government guy as any of them and he has no clue what he's doing. That man's liable to get us all killed over a silly mistake or slight; we don't need him in office.

Mawa February 18th, 2016 6:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Fail (Post 9123452)
The thing is, if the FBI had asked for just the one phone to be unlocked by Apple, rather than ask them for a backdoor into the phone, I think it could have ended differently.

Oh I thought it was for one person only! So yeah it's different...

donavannj February 18th, 2016 6:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123454)
It kinda is, because no consumers = no money, and companies will only care if they're making less money. They don't want their current/future customers killed from a terrorist attack. This too is part of the cruel reality we live in, unless we wish to make it cruel than it is.

By this logic, Ford, Toyota, GM, Honda, et al, should just give the fbi and other police agencies a copy of your car keys because sometimes people use their cars to go commit a murder. Or that the builder who built your house or the real estate agent who sold you your house should give the FBI a key so they can pop in and investigate your stuff without a warrant. The IPhone is your private property once you purchase it.

Tsutarja February 18th, 2016 9:53 AM

This decision by Apple gave me more respect for them as a company. I am glad that they choose to value security for all of their customers considering that the US government could use such power against us as citizens if the order were to go through.

Mewtwolover February 18th, 2016 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flight (Post 9123818)
This seems like Microsoft would support Apple and Google's endeavor's here. Hoping to hear from Satya Nadella himself at some point, though.

edit: it seems that they do support Apple.

That's hard to believe when we know that Microsoft is actively colluding with the NSA and Windows 10 is spyware OS directly from NSA's wet dreams.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123436)
Did Apple also try to realize that their consumers may also be at risk from another terrorist attack, and that San Bernadino attacker's device may contain important evidence to track down these terrorists? Privacy is important, yes, but would you go so far to protect the identity of someone who may have a connection to the same people the government is trying to stop?

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” -Benjamin Franklin

Dter ic February 18th, 2016 2:27 PM

Ultimately this issue boils down to the indiscriminate nature of encryption. It doesn't allow 'special access' to specific people like the government agencies because the entire point of encryption is to allow private communication between the people who are allowed to do so. Any sort of backdoor would defeat the purpose of encryption to begin with. (for users privacy's sake) Who is to say only the people who wanted the backdoor can use it? Even criminals themselves could use backdoors to steal private information if they wanted.

The danger of requiring a backdoor could affect every tech company if Apple gave into the order - the FBI might next want to demand every company install a backdoor and would therefore lead to a major issue of privacy for every consumer in the world.

Tsutarja February 18th, 2016 5:45 PM

Well, as long as McAfee's doing it within legal constraint, then maybe? I don't think Apple (or the federal government) would respond well to him though if he were to actually pull it off.

Sopheria February 18th, 2016 7:01 PM

It's already been said, but yea, what I find most unsettling about this is that they're asking Apple to give them a backdoor to access any and all iOS devices. They already have the power to access the data on a device, as long as they have a warrant (provided it's even accessible to the company and isn't hashed or something). But getting a backdoor to encrypted data is overkill, and it strikes me as an opportunistic attempt to take advantage of the situation in order to increase their surveillance capabilities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123436)
Did Apple also try to realize that their consumers may also be at risk from another terrorist attack, and that San Bernadino attacker's device may contain important evidence to track down these terrorists? Privacy is important, yes, but would you go so far to protect the identity of someone who may have a connection to the same people the government is trying to stop?

But if you look at it from Apple's perspective, imagine if they did give the FBI what they're asking for. That would put the iPhone in the position of being the only phone on the market that the FBI can spy on. Android sales would skyrocket, iPhone sales would plummet--at least to some degree. All in all, privacy is something customers care about, and if customers don't get it from Apple they'll simply go elsewhere.

Desert Stream~ February 18th, 2016 7:54 PM

1 Iphone? ok... all devices? what the heck? No!

Legendary Silke February 18th, 2016 10:58 PM

The only thing I can think of is "well, if only FBI had asked for something else... namely, access to just this phone"

Then again, I don't think there's a "perfect" answer to this kind of problem, to be honest.

Mewtwolover February 19th, 2016 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flight (Post 9124623)
@deleted post...meant to say accidental double post, but my phone was acting weird...anyway!

Well, this case took a surprising turn.

It seems that John McAfee is offering to decrypt the iPhone. Do you guys think McAfee and his team would be able to pull it off?

It's also possible that FBI can open the phone by using dead terrorist's fingerprints so there might be no need to hack it after all.

King Elizabello February 19th, 2016 11:29 AM

Sooner or later Apple will surrender and FBI will check about it it's just a matter of time in my opinion. Ofc Apple's CEO is thinking like every company but when it goes to FBI and stuff like that then it's like throwing a pokeball to a pokemon sooner or later it will be caught that's what i think.

Thepowaofhax February 19th, 2016 1:25 PM

This is the reason why the Government of America will kill itself. It sees itself not as a democracy, but as an oligarchy and it must be abolished it it wants to keep up this kind of tyranny. From it's shitty justice system (where anyone who's rich and can afford a lawyer gets their court sentence decreased by 90%), large amounts of taxes on all classes, ignoring the constitution in favor of a falsified sense of "safety" as well as other ridiculousness (such as Oregon; they shot a protester to death after "reaching for a weapon" even though his weapon was at his holster and he was reaching for his chest) and the fact that Hillary Clinton gets a fucking free slate and can still run as fucking president but Edward Snowden does the same shit and is branded a traitor.

The sad fact is they do this shit all the time. While we're too busing looking through the candidates to find the shiniest pile of shit, they're doing shit like slipping in CISA in our budget bills. This government is a fucking joke. I sincerely hope Apple doesn't give into any other attempt of mass surveillance on their platform.

Megan February 19th, 2016 2:14 PM

If there's an order from the FBI to get access to every phone produced by Apple it kind of makes me wonder how good the US security system really is. After all, if you rely on backdoors in devices you already give outsiders an option for an attack.

Needless to say, Apple should not allow such shenanigans. Business is a matter of trust. If you give your customer a device that allows him to store sensible data, then you pretty much have to make sure to give as much safety as possible, or else he won't be your customer for long.
Quote:

Originally Posted by donavannj (Post 9123830)
By this logic, Ford, Toyota, GM, Honda, et al, should just give the fbi and other police agencies a copy of your car keys because sometimes people use their cars to go commit a murder. Or that the builder who built your house or the real estate agent who sold you your house should give the FBI a key so they can pop in and investigate your stuff without a warrant. The IPhone is your private property once you purchase it.

You can't live inside an iPhone, though. Not saying that you're wrong, but I feel those examples aren't really comparable.

donavannj February 19th, 2016 2:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R.F. (Post 9125752)
You can't live inside an iPhone, though. Not saying that you're wrong, but I feel those examples aren't really comparable.

I think they're comparable because they're private property that contains things that belong to you that can be secured with a key, be it a physical or digital key.

King Elizabello February 27th, 2016 5:18 AM

What will happen is simple Apple lovers will cry because FBI will probably shut down Apple once and for all and then Steve will revive and slap Cook for not hearing FBI i know it's your company but when it comes to FBI,CIA e.t.c you just have to let it pass that's what i think. It's like when you pass through security check in an airport for example (I think except if you are a priest or something like that you have the right to not be checked) but if you are normal then you can't deny the security check. So sorry Apple lovers but check this site if the most unsatisfying event happens http://www.gsmarena.com/.

Altius February 27th, 2016 7:35 AM

If Apple gives in and creates a backdoor for the FBI, I'm certain other software products will be forced to do the same. Eventually.

Maki-Nishikino February 27th, 2016 8:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinkie-Dawn (Post 9123436)
Did Apple also try to realize that their consumers may also be at risk from another terrorist attack, and that San Bernadino attacker's device may contain important evidence to track down these terrorists? Privacy is important, yes, but would you go so far to protect the identity of someone who may have a connection to the same people the government is trying to stop?

if anything our own government is the real terrorists and word going around is they really wanted this special ios version so they could get there way into all iphones and possibly ipads as well since the modified firmware would be stored on FBI servers

Pinkie-Dawn February 27th, 2016 9:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dawn-Berlitz (Post 9137549)
if anything our own government is the real terrorists and word going around is they really wanted this special ios version so they could get there way into all iphones and possibly ipads as well since the modified firmware would be stored on FBI servers

Where did you hear this from? The government only wanted the iPhone to find evidence in regards to ISIS, but Apple refused their help in fear that they'll abuse this practice to other companies in the future.

Dter ic March 30th, 2016 4:37 AM

The FBI has successfully recovered data from the iPhone 5C by some unknown method a few days ago but now the US government are saying that they will use the precedent set by the iPhone case to force any software company to disable security measures in order to grant government access. This was all despite previous statements from officials that the iPhone unlocking case was just for a single device.

Tsutarja April 22nd, 2016 7:44 PM

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/21/fbi-paid-more-than-13m-to-hack-san-bernardino-iphone.html

So apparently the FBI had paid $1.3 million just to get the iPhone hacked with the data they were looking for. That's quite a lot, but with that much money being involved, it still scares me at the kind of resources the government would go for in terms of breaching security of mobile phones now.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:19 PM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.