CDZ Apple vs FBI

[jon_berzerk]

So when companies grow large, they are allowed to ignore a court order? It's a matter of national security and Apple is not giving up anything. Tim Cook should be in jail for Contempt of Court.

The fact of the matter is that everyone is free to ignore a court order. Doing so has consequences, just as not ignoring one has consequences. They just happen to be different consequences. Nevertheless, one, large company or irrelevant individual, need not comply with a court order. If one does so out of stupidity, ignorance or principle is of no matter; the consequences ignoring the court order are likely to be the same, or at least they should be.

apple could not ignore the order

they responded

they made a motion to vacate

since they did not get their day in court from the first order the judge writ

Your remark indicates they did not ignore the order, not that they could not.

exactly

apple did not know about the hearing until after the hearing was done and the order written

 

[Pop23]

So when companies grow large, they are allowed to ignore a court order? It's a matter of national security and Apple is not giving up anything. Tim Cook should be in jail for Contempt of Court.

The matter of national security is the protection of the data contained on individual, law abiding citizens phones.

 

[beagle9]

Look, for me it's really quite simple. If Apple can be forced to hack into their own system (or modify the OS so the Feds can), then nothing is safe anymore. The Feds can force a Safe manufacturer to crack a safe of a "suspect", they can force Google to hack into your g-mail, they can force any tech company to hack into any system they can get a warrant for. Do the Feds force Master Lock Company to create a key that will unlock any of their padlocks? No, the Feds need to provide their own way of opening those locks. Does Kwikset have to make all keys to their locks available to the Feds? No, the Feds have to come up with their own means of gaining entry to a room/home. Does Microsoft have to make a "back door" available for the Feds to hack into a PC? No, the Feds have to find it (if it exists) themselves. How is this any different? Just because it's tough? This would set a dangerous president, if Apple is forced to provide this "hack", there is nothing stopping the Feds from forcing anyone to do anything they want, as long as they have a warrant. A warrant only "forces" the owner/occupant to comply, not the manufacturer of a good, otherwise they could force your local home builder to break into a home they built. Same thing, different tech.

. Ok, you say let the feds do it themselves right ? Well wouldn't you as a tech giant want to know what is going on in them attempting to create something that deals with your systems, and this way if they were to figure something out then you would be a part of it instead of being a hostile to it ?

 

[jon_berzerk]

just in

in the feng case the judge has ruled in favor of apple

Apple

 

[FA_Q2]

. One of it's customers phones ?????? How about when that customer becomes a killer that has used that device to conduct terrorist plots and used terrorist contacts on that device probably ? Open the phone already, and then trash the backdoor in which the company would only know about, and would insure the same classification as top security information in which is protected by the government as well as Apple would be in such a case

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

. Nope I'm saying that once an individual commits a henious crime, and becomes the subject of an intense investigation, then everything will be investigated including their Phone. Computer, house, cars etc. Yes their friends should be questioned as well. Now whose to say that Apple hasn't already checked the contents of the phone from a stand off position somhow, are they hiding something ? You see because the phone was a part of the investigation, then it best Apple open it before Apple itself becomes a suspect in the investigation also, and this instead of it being just a helpful corporate participant that is poised to do the right thing. If it becomes a suspect who is attempting to obstruct and hide information in a very important investigation, then under court order the government can order Apple to get in the phone after deemed also a suspect in the investigation.

That's just crazy! Apple is a suspect because they've created a phone that has a high level of security and they don't want to compromise that security??? Once the government acquires the right to order a company to compromise one of their products in order to support some government agenda, where does it stop? Can they then order Apple to build something into their phones that allows the government to spy on the users of their products?

Apple becomes an accomplice or suspect by not cooperating in an investigation wherefore it is assisting or aiding and abedding a murdering criminal who killed Americans in a most heinus act of violence by obstructing the investigation as they are. Matters not about our fears that go beyond what the government has requested of Apple, but only that we should be watchful to make sure that all involved honor their word in this. The government stated it only wants the info, and not the phone or the knowledge of how it is obtained for them by Apple. I think in this case Apple has over played it's hand. They should be a willing participant under the guidelines given it, instead of being an unwilling participant where as the government next orders them to participate in a more transparent way to give them what they want. If the government orders them to do so, then it may go to far under the court order, and that's when it may learn things it doesn't need to know.

You are not correctly representing what the government wants. They have not asked Apple to get the information from the phone. They have asked Apple to modify the phone's operating system so that the FBI can hack into it and get the information that they want. Once that modified OS exists then it is possible that other hackers can acquire it.

That's not really my point, however. My main concern is that Apple's acquiescence to this order sets a very dangerous precedent that basically allows the government to make demands on tech companies to compromise the integrity of their devices. It is extremely unlikely that the particular device in question contains any information that will really be useful so I have to believe that the FBI has a bigger agenda than this particular case.

That is the entire point of the case. The FBI really could give a rats ass about the phone in question - what they want is to create the precedence that requires tech companies to do the FBI's dirty work for them. It takes a lot of resources and know how to hack devices. It would be a lot simpler if the FBI could simply order someone else to do it for them whenever they decided they wanted access to a device. More importantly, it would essentially force manufacturers to build in back doors for their products as they could become liable should they not be able to break into a device.

This case is used because the extraordinary powers that people are ready to simply hand over to the government out of a bizarre fear of terrorism in any shape or form. We allowed the NSA to set up a nation wide monitoring network that made anything before it look like child's play without a peep. I believe they felt this was the perfect time to grab this particular extraordinary and unconstitutional power from the people. Fortunately it seems to have failed.

 

[FA_Q2]

"Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?"

Article VI, US Constitution.

And it's not 'hacking' anyone's phone – it's being instructed to give the FBI access to the phone pursuant to a lawful court order.

"Why do Republican candidates who claim to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government side with the government on this issue?"

The government's request to access the phone is consistent with 4th and 5th Amendment jurisprudence, as determined by a neutral magistrate, based on the facts and evidence of the request, where no rights are being 'violated.'

No, it is not and the courts have not allowed it to continue.

This neutral magistrate got it wrong. It happens.

 

[FA_Q2]

Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?

Why do Republican candidates who claim to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government side with the government on this issue?

Red:
The All Writs Act of 1789.

• Annotation 6 - Article III - FindLaw
  
• A judge used a 227-year-old law to force Apple to hack the iPhone's security

Blue:
Because folks who hold great power, or who have a reasonable expectation of soon holding it, recognize damn well that they too will want to have a means of exacting their influence in a court of law when circumstances arise for which there is no other legal guidance or precedent pertaining specifically to the situation.

The idea of the All Writs Act is consistent with the principle of representative democracy, with what it means to be a republic. In a republic, citizens choose other citizens and empower them to make the best decisions they can on the electorate's behalf. Republicans and Democrats both understand that and neither wants to see constrained their ability to do so, regardless of which party holds sway at any given moment, merely because our legal system is silent on a specific matter.

The key issue:

"The All Writs Act only applies if compliance is not an unreasonable burden."

It seems to me that Apple can make a very good case that this is an unreasonable burden.

It is unreasonable for law enforcement to want to get into that phone ? The burden on Apple to get into that phone is very reasonable and very critical.

Frankly, the U.S. Government doesn't much talk about it's computer prowess and "cyber-war" endeavors, but there's no denying that it, like China and other world powers, has among the best hackers on the planet. Why they haven't hacked the damn thing already is beyond me. How much can it take to go buy an iPhone or two to "mess with" and figure out how to hack the things before using the actual one they want to access?

If you ask me, I think the government has already done that and hacked the darn phone. I suspect, however, that the info they obtained is of a nature that were the FBI to use the information they gained, it would become obvious that they have hacked it. I think the FBI feel that it's in their interest to let the general public believe that the iPhone is inaccessible. Forcing Apple to give them the "hack" eliminates the presumption that the government has already gotten what they want. I suspect that if "push comes to shove," and events warrant the FBI use the info they ostensibly already have, they'll use it, but in the interim they'll proceed with their legal front.

Another thing that may be "in play" is that the FBI have identified a one-off sort of "hack" for the phone they have from the San Bernardino event, but they want a solution that is more general and that at the very least they can use (or enhance) on any iPhone rather than having to "re-invent the wheel," as it were, each time they encounter a need to do so. The most efficient means to the end is to get the code/technique from Apple and, if need be, enhance it themselves; Apple will know what is "general" with regard to all iPhones and what is specific to each iPhone. The FBI would otherwise have to figure that out on their own, which may be no mean feat.

Given my speculative thoughts above, my question would not be why or whereof do the FBI obtain the authority to demand Apple "hack" the phone. It'd be why does the FBI want or need that in the first place. I know ostensibly they cannot crack the phone they want to. I just don't buy that. The NSA built and got a major "hack/worm" implemented in Iran's nuclear enrichment systems. That they don't collaborate with the rest of the U.S. national security community -- FBI, CIA, etc. -- is just preposterous and naive to believe.

I don't know if they have already hacked it or not. I do think that it is laughable to think that they are not able to though. That simply belies reason.

They just want the power to force others to do it for them in the future. It would allow them access to a myriad of other devices that simply do not warrant the time and resources to hack and pull the information from. It is not worth all the effort to hack the small time dealers phone or the street vendor selling stolen goods. If they could simply order Apple to do the work for them OTOH, that would be an entirely different story. They could force Apple and other companies to take most of that burden or, at the very least, take most of that burden away. It would, as I stated above, force companies to eventually build in back doors into their code for the government and make a surveillance state a LOT easier for the government to implement.

I am not entirely sure why you are torn on this though. For me this is not a 49:51 issue more like 99:1. This is excruciatingly simple - there is no precedent for the government to have this extraordinary power, there is nothing that gives the government this power and there certainly is no good reason to give them this power out of fear.

 

[FA_Q2]

"Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?"

Article VI, US Constitution.

And it's not 'hacking' anyone's phone – it's being instructed to give the FBI access to the phone pursuant to a lawful court order.

"Why do Republican candidates who claim to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government side with the government on this issue?"

The government's request to access the phone is consistent with 4th and 5th Amendment jurisprudence, as determined by a neutral magistrate, based on the facts and evidence of the request, where no rights are being 'violated.'

The FBI already has access to the phone. The request violates Apple's right to protect the privacy of the users of their products and the rights to privacy of those users. Apple is being asked to modify the operating system of the phone so that the FBI can use standard hacking methodologies to access the information on that phone.

. Apple was asked to defeat the security on that specific phone right, and this is not a request thrown at Apple to invade the privacy of it's good customers, but to cooperate in a criminal investigation instead right? Now yes Apple should understand carefully what the government might want, and if it wants more than the investigation of the one phone calls for, then a public outting of that request should be publisized and scrutinized in order that privacy standards of Apple are protected. Negotiations should take place that insures that Apple isn't requested to give up anymore than is nessesary. The government if trying to go beyond what they should in the case, ought to be shamed before the public that they have tried such a thing.

One of the problems for Apple is that, once they have developed software that allows the FBI to defeat security on this particular phone, there is the potential for other people to get access to that software and use it to hack any iphone

And because they will need to preserve a chain of evidence, any indictments that would come from this would be available through discovery.

That's how it works.

No one will buy an apple product after that.

. And did Apple blow this thing up bigger than it should have been, therefore bringing about all the unwanted exposure in which will be seen as a negative for Apple anyway ?

Negative? You are kidding right?

This is AMAZING press for Apple. Just imagine the commercial - Apple, so secure the NSA cant even get into it.

Apple could not purchase this kind of press in a million years.

 

[FA_Q2]

So when companies grow large, they are allowed to ignore a court order? It's a matter of national security and Apple is not giving up anything. Tim Cook should be in jail for Contempt of Court.

?

They ignored nothing at all. They challenged the decision which is well within legal standards. Then they, rightfully, won.

 

[FA_Q2]

Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?

Why do Republican candidates who claim to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government side with the government on this issue?

. One of it's customers phones ?????? How about when that customer becomes a killer that has used that device to conduct terrorist plots and used terrorist contacts on that device probably ? Open the phone already, and then trash the backdoor in which the company would only know about, and would insure the same classification as top security information in which is protected by the government as well as Apple would be in such a case

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

Whose rights are they trampling on?

Old soul already addressed this:

Look, for me it's really quite simple. If Apple can be forced to hack into their own system (or modify the OS so the Feds can), then nothing is safe anymore. The Feds can force a Safe manufacturer to crack a safe of a "suspect", they can force Google to hack into your g-mail, they can force any tech company to hack into any system they can get a warrant for. Do the Feds force Master Lock Company to create a key that will unlock any of their padlocks? No, the Feds need to provide their own way of opening those locks. Does Kwikset have to make all keys to their locks available to the Feds? No, the Feds have to come up with their own means of gaining entry to a room/home. Does Microsoft have to make a "back door" available for the Feds to hack into a PC? No, the Feds have to find it (if it exists) themselves. How is this any different? Just because it's tough? This would set a dangerous president, if Apple is forced to provide this "hack", there is nothing stopping the Feds from forcing anyone to do anything they want, as long as they have a warrant. A warrant only "forces" the owner/occupant to comply, not the manufacturer of a good, otherwise they could force your local home builder to break into a home they built. Same thing, different tech.

It really is not a matter of rights though and I think that is a poor choice of wording. It is a matter of powers. What they are trying to do is gain a new and extraordinary power - the power to force a third party to aid in the investigation against its will. A third party that has nothing to do with the crime or acts in question to boot.

The government does not have that power and absolutely should not have that power.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?

You know a thread is bad when it starts out with two known lies.

First, this phone did not belong to the terrorist. It belonged to his employer who already gave Apple permission to access it. This is all on Apple.

Second, nobody is asking Apple to hack their phone. They are only asking that Apple disable the software that after 10 missed guesses the phone erases itself. That's it. The FBI wants to try to guess the password but can't because after 10 guesses the phone will brick itself.

 

[beagle9]

QUOTE="FA_Q2, post: 13644782, member: 21905"]

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

. Nope I'm saying that once an individual commits a henious crime, and becomes the subject of an intense investigation, then everything will be investigated including their Phone. Computer, house, cars etc. Yes their friends should be questioned as well. Now whose to say that Apple hasn't already checked the contents of the phone from a stand off position somhow, are they hiding something ? You see because the phone was a part of the investigation, then it best Apple open it before Apple itself becomes a suspect in the investigation also, and this instead of it being just a helpful corporate participant that is poised to do the right thing. If it becomes a suspect who is attempting to obstruct and hide information in a very important investigation, then under court order the government can order Apple to get in the phone after deemed also a suspect in the investigation.

That's just crazy! Apple is a suspect because they've created a phone that has a high level of security and they don't want to compromise that security??? Once the government acquires the right to order a company to compromise one of their products in order to support some government agenda, where does it stop? Can they then order Apple to build something into their phones that allows the government to spy on the users of their products?

Apple becomes an accomplice or suspect by not cooperating in an investigation wherefore it is assisting or aiding and abedding a murdering criminal who killed Americans in a most heinus act of violence by obstructing the investigation as they are. Matters not about our fears that go beyond what the government has requested of Apple, but only that we should be watchful to make sure that all involved honor their word in this. The government stated it only wants the info, and not the phone or the knowledge of how it is obtained for them by Apple. I think in this case Apple has over played it's hand. They should be a willing participant under the guidelines given it, instead of being an unwilling participant where as the government next orders them to participate in a more transparent way to give them what they want. If the government orders them to do so, then it may go to far under the court order, and that's when it may learn things it doesn't need to know.

You are not correctly representing what the government wants. They have not asked Apple to get the information from the phone. They have asked Apple to modify the phone's operating system so that the FBI can hack into it and get the information that they want. Once that modified OS exists then it is possible that other hackers can acquire it.

That's not really my point, however. My main concern is that Apple's acquiescence to this order sets a very dangerous precedent that basically allows the government to make demands on tech companies to compromise the integrity of their devices. It is extremely unlikely that the particular device in question contains any information that will really be useful so I have to believe that the FBI has a bigger agenda than this particular case.
That is the entire point of the case. The FBI really could give a rats ass about the phone in question - what they want is to create the precedence that requires tech companies to do the FBI's dirty work for them. It takes a lot of resources and know how to hack devices. It would be a lot simpler if the FBI could simply order someone else to do it for them whenever they decided they wanted access to a device. More importantly, it would essentially force manufacturers to build in back doors for their products as they could become liable should they not be able to break into a device.This
case is used because the extraordinary powers that people are ready to simply hand over to the government out of a bizarre fear of terrorism in any shape or form. We allowed the NSA to set up a nation wide monitoring network that made anything before it look like child's play without a peep. I believe they felt this was the perfect time to grab this particular extraordinary and unconstitutional power from the people. Fortunately it seems to have failed.

Ok, but can Apple or anyone else for that matter "GUARANTEE" that their products won't be used against this nation by terrorist ? Will they insure that the security that they create, won't be used without consequence of the law ? Not sure how the quotes above got tangled up, but oh well..

 

[beagle9]

Is it right that anything created here, can actually be used against this nation from within without consequence ? The sad thing is that under any other circumstance Apple may have a case, but unlucky for them the terrorist just happen to have one of their products in their possession, and worse it is a product that can hide their secrets from an investigation into a terrorism case. Again Apple should be willing to work with the investigation, but have it's lawyers ready to go.

 

[oldsoul]

Look, for me it's really quite simple. If Apple can be forced to hack into their own system (or modify the OS so the Feds can), then nothing is safe anymore. The Feds can force a Safe manufacturer to crack a safe of a "suspect", they can force Google to hack into your g-mail, they can force any tech company to hack into any system they can get a warrant for. Do the Feds force Master Lock Company to create a key that will unlock any of their padlocks? No, the Feds need to provide their own way of opening those locks. Does Kwikset have to make all keys to their locks available to the Feds? No, the Feds have to come up with their own means of gaining entry to a room/home. Does Microsoft have to make a "back door" available for the Feds to hack into a PC? No, the Feds have to find it (if it exists) themselves. How is this any different? Just because it's tough? This would set a dangerous president, if Apple is forced to provide this "hack", there is nothing stopping the Feds from forcing anyone to do anything they want, as long as they have a warrant. A warrant only "forces" the owner/occupant to comply, not the manufacturer of a good, otherwise they could force your local home builder to break into a home they built. Same thing, different tech.

. Ok, you say let the feds do it themselves right ? Well wouldn't you as a tech giant want to know what is going on in them attempting to create something that deals with your systems, and this way if they were to figure something out then you would be a part of it instead of being a hostile to it ?

Of course I would want to know, that does not mean that I should know, or have the right to know. What the Feds do to apprehend international terrorists is, IMHO, a matter of national security.

 

[Skylar]

Where does the government get the authority to order Apple to hack one of it's customer's phones?

I could see a commerce regulation argument. Or a simple national security argument.

Why do Republican candidates who claim to support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and limited government side with the government on this issue?

Because most republicans are authoritarian. Especially around issues of national security.

 

[Skylar]

. One of it's customers phones ?????? How about when that customer becomes a killer that has used that device to conduct terrorist plots and used terrorist contacts on that device probably ? Open the phone already, and then trash the backdoor in which the company would only know about, and would insure the same classification as top security information in which is protected by the government as well as Apple would be in such a case

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

. Nope I'm saying that once an individual commits a henious crime, and becomes the subject of an intense investigation, then everything will be investigated including their Phone. Computer, house, cars etc. Yes their friends should be questioned as well. Now whose to say that Apple hasn't already checked the contents of the phone from a stand off position somhow, are they hiding something ? You see because the phone was a part of the investigation, then it best Apple open it before Apple itself becomes a suspect in the investigation also, and this instead of it being just a helpful corporate participant that is poised to do the right thing. If it becomes a suspect who is attempting to obstruct and hide information in a very important investigation, then under court order the government can order Apple to get in the phone after deemed also a suspect in the investigation.

That's just crazy! Apple is a suspect because they've created a phone that has a high level of security and they don't want to compromise that security??? Once the government acquires the right to order a company to compromise one of their products in order to support some government agenda, where does it stop? Can they then order Apple to build something into their phones that allows the government to spy on the users of their products?

Apple becomes an accomplice or suspect by not cooperating in an investigation wherefore it is assisting or aiding and abedding a murdering criminal who killed Americans in a most heinus act of violence by obstructing the investigation as they are. Matters not about our fears that go beyond what the government has requested of Apple, but only that we should be watchful to make sure that all involved honor their word in this. The government stated it only wants the info, and not the phone or the knowledge of how it is obtained for them by Apple. I think in this case Apple has over played it's hand. They should be a willing participant under the guidelines given it, instead of being an unwilling participant where as the government next orders them to participate in a more transparent way to give them what they want. If the government orders them to do so, then it may go to far under the court order, and that's when it may learn things it doesn't need to know.

You are not correctly representing what the government wants. They have not asked Apple to get the information from the phone. They have asked Apple to modify the phone's operating system so that the FBI can hack into it and get the information that they want. Once that modified OS exists then it is possible that other hackers can acquire it.

That's not really my point, however. My main concern is that Apple's acquiescence to this order sets a very dangerous precedent that basically allows the government to make demands on tech companies to compromise the integrity of their devices. It is extremely unlikely that the particular device in question contains any information that will really be useful so I have to believe that the FBI has a bigger agenda than this particular case.

I was curious if Apple might be able to create a method of accessing the phone that was in part, mechanical. physical chip set, a series of physical switches that would have to be moved, something along those lines. With the methodology, program and access information kept locally in a single site at apple. A site with no externally accessible network, no internet, nothing. You'd physically have to be there.

The FBI could send the phones to Apple. Apple could walk the phones in.....and unlock them. Then send them back to the FBI.

That way the odds of a 'hacker' gaining access would be astronomically low.

 

[alang1216]

I think Snowden (and the many that came before him) showed that nothing valuable won't leak out. Also this would really hurt Apple's business overseas, who would ever trust them again?

As I understand it, Apple gave the FBI access to everything from the phone that had been backed up to the iCloud. No one knows if there is anything of value still in the phone so I have to stand with Apple on this one.

 

[Skylar]

I think Snowden (and the many that came before him) showed that nothing valuable won't leak out. Also this would really hurt Apple's business overseas, who would ever trust them again?

As I understand it, Apple gave the FBI access to everything from the phone that had been backed up to the iCloud. No one knows if there is anything of value still in the phone so I have to stand with Apple on this one.

Yeah, but a process that required a physical, mechanical component? It would be much harder to duplicate.

 

[FA_Q2]

QUOTE="FA_Q2, post: 13644782, member: 21905"]

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

. Nope I'm saying that once an individual commits a henious crime, and becomes the subject of an intense investigation, then everything will be investigated including their Phone. Computer, house, cars etc. Yes their friends should be questioned as well. Now whose to say that Apple hasn't already checked the contents of the phone from a stand off position somhow, are they hiding something ? You see because the phone was a part of the investigation, then it best Apple open it before Apple itself becomes a suspect in the investigation also, and this instead of it being just a helpful corporate participant that is poised to do the right thing. If it becomes a suspect who is attempting to obstruct and hide information in a very important investigation, then under court order the government can order Apple to get in the phone after deemed also a suspect in the investigation.

That's just crazy! Apple is a suspect because they've created a phone that has a high level of security and they don't want to compromise that security??? Once the government acquires the right to order a company to compromise one of their products in order to support some government agenda, where does it stop? Can they then order Apple to build something into their phones that allows the government to spy on the users of their products?

Apple becomes an accomplice or suspect by not cooperating in an investigation wherefore it is assisting or aiding and abedding a murdering criminal who killed Americans in a most heinus act of violence by obstructing the investigation as they are. Matters not about our fears that go beyond what the government has requested of Apple, but only that we should be watchful to make sure that all involved honor their word in this. The government stated it only wants the info, and not the phone or the knowledge of how it is obtained for them by Apple. I think in this case Apple has over played it's hand. They should be a willing participant under the guidelines given it, instead of being an unwilling participant where as the government next orders them to participate in a more transparent way to give them what they want. If the government orders them to do so, then it may go to far under the court order, and that's when it may learn things it doesn't need to know.

You are not correctly representing what the government wants. They have not asked Apple to get the information from the phone. They have asked Apple to modify the phone's operating system so that the FBI can hack into it and get the information that they want. Once that modified OS exists then it is possible that other hackers can acquire it.

That's not really my point, however. My main concern is that Apple's acquiescence to this order sets a very dangerous precedent that basically allows the government to make demands on tech companies to compromise the integrity of their devices. It is extremely unlikely that the particular device in question contains any information that will really be useful so I have to believe that the FBI has a bigger agenda than this particular case.
That is the entire point of the case. The FBI really could give a rats ass about the phone in question - what they want is to create the precedence that requires tech companies to do the FBI's dirty work for them. It takes a lot of resources and know how to hack devices. It would be a lot simpler if the FBI could simply order someone else to do it for them whenever they decided they wanted access to a device. More importantly, it would essentially force manufacturers to build in back doors for their products as they could become liable should they not be able to break into a device.This
case is used because the extraordinary powers that people are ready to simply hand over to the government out of a bizarre fear of terrorism in any shape or form. We allowed the NSA to set up a nation wide monitoring network that made anything before it look like child's play without a peep. I believe they felt this was the perfect time to grab this particular extraordinary and unconstitutional power from the people. Fortunately it seems to have failed.

Ok, but can Apple or anyone else for that matter "GUARANTEE" that their products won't be used against this nation by terrorist ? Will they insure that the security that they create, won't be used without consequence of the law ? Not sure how the quotes above got tangled up, but oh well..

No they can't. Just like the manufacturers of an AR cannot guarantee that their weapons will not be used in a terrorist act. Just like those manufacturers, Apple is not liable for the illegal use of their product nor should they be.

Is it right that anything created here, can actually be used against this nation from within without consequence ? The sad thing is that under any other circumstance Apple may have a case, but unlucky for them the terrorist just happen to have one of their products in their possession, and worse it is a product that can hide their secrets from an investigation into a terrorism case. Again Apple should be willing to work with the investigation, but have it's lawyers ready to go.

Apple not only has a case - they already won.

 

[FA_Q2]

So are you saying that whenever an individual commits a heinous crime the government suddenly acquires the authority to trample the rights of anyone who is associated in any way with that individual?

. Nope I'm saying that once an individual commits a henious crime, and becomes the subject of an intense investigation, then everything will be investigated including their Phone. Computer, house, cars etc. Yes their friends should be questioned as well. Now whose to say that Apple hasn't already checked the contents of the phone from a stand off position somhow, are they hiding something ? You see because the phone was a part of the investigation, then it best Apple open it before Apple itself becomes a suspect in the investigation also, and this instead of it being just a helpful corporate participant that is poised to do the right thing. If it becomes a suspect who is attempting to obstruct and hide information in a very important investigation, then under court order the government can order Apple to get in the phone after deemed also a suspect in the investigation.

That's just crazy! Apple is a suspect because they've created a phone that has a high level of security and they don't want to compromise that security??? Once the government acquires the right to order a company to compromise one of their products in order to support some government agenda, where does it stop? Can they then order Apple to build something into their phones that allows the government to spy on the users of their products?

Apple becomes an accomplice or suspect by not cooperating in an investigation wherefore it is assisting or aiding and abedding a murdering criminal who killed Americans in a most heinus act of violence by obstructing the investigation as they are. Matters not about our fears that go beyond what the government has requested of Apple, but only that we should be watchful to make sure that all involved honor their word in this. The government stated it only wants the info, and not the phone or the knowledge of how it is obtained for them by Apple. I think in this case Apple has over played it's hand. They should be a willing participant under the guidelines given it, instead of being an unwilling participant where as the government next orders them to participate in a more transparent way to give them what they want. If the government orders them to do so, then it may go to far under the court order, and that's when it may learn things it doesn't need to know.

You are not correctly representing what the government wants. They have not asked Apple to get the information from the phone. They have asked Apple to modify the phone's operating system so that the FBI can hack into it and get the information that they want. Once that modified OS exists then it is possible that other hackers can acquire it.

That's not really my point, however. My main concern is that Apple's acquiescence to this order sets a very dangerous precedent that basically allows the government to make demands on tech companies to compromise the integrity of their devices. It is extremely unlikely that the particular device in question contains any information that will really be useful so I have to believe that the FBI has a bigger agenda than this particular case.

I was curious if Apple might be able to create a method of accessing the phone that was in part, mechanical. physical chip set, a series of physical switches that would have to be moved, something along those lines. With the methodology, program and access information kept locally in a single site at apple. A site with no externally accessible network, no internet, nothing. You'd physically have to be there.

The FBI could send the phones to Apple. Apple could walk the phones in.....and unlock them. Then send them back to the FBI.

That way the odds of a 'hacker' gaining access would be astronomically low.

I can see that as certainly possible.

The question in my mind really is not if such is possible. The real question is weather or not the government should have the power to compel them to do so. I think the answer is a resounding no.