MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Apple Encryption Engineers, if Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist – New York Times

hank
edited March 2016 in Off-Topic
Really conflicted on this. Rely heavily on two IPads, a Gen 3 for home use and a newer/smaller Mini for travel. They contain virtually EVERYTHING - including financial data. I synchronize their contents and also back-up to the cloud. Both are set to erase all content after 10 unsuccessful attempts to enter an access code. That's Apple's method of protecting your information and what the government is seeking Apple's help in defeating.

I also have a great deal of respect for Apple's lead attorney, Ted Olson, former U.S. Solicitor General under GW Bush, who lost his wife Barbara Olson on one of the hijacked 9-11 planes. The fact some of our spooks (NSA and CIA) appear conflicted on this issue makes me suspect the government already has the capacity to break into these devices but won't admit it. (If they don't know how, maybe they need to figure it out.)

http://allbreakingnews.com/apple-encryption-engineers-if-ordered-to-unlock-iphone-might-resist-new-york-times/

Comments

  • Sven
    @hank, I don't have a complete answer to your dilemma with iCloud storage. As I understand several could-based storage services have been compromised. Many of them don't use encryption.

    Alternatively, you may consider storing your data on several portable hard drives, and store them in more than one physical location away from your home. Each files or the entire hard drive can be password protected. This again is less than ideal in terms of convenience and security, but this would keep others from assessing them from the backdoor.
  • AnnaAnna
    edited March 2016
    Isn't this the choice American's ultimately must make. Potentially, the price of more freedom in this area is an increase in risk. I have observed that many people are quick to say that someone is not doing their job if any of the risk shows it's head. I don't what has happened in this country. We have gone from proudly bearing the risk that comes with our principles to expecting someone else to take the risk and deliver to us on golden plates the fruits of our principles. Aint gonna happen.
  • InformalEconomist
    From NPR discussions with experts that I have listened to, the gathering consensus seems to be that FBI could access the phone but wants - badly - to establish a precedent.

    A cybersecurity expert opined that NSA *should* beef up its decryption capabilities but that FBI could not call on NSA for assistance because NSA would then have to show its hand in court.

    And the FBI erased access to material stored in the cloud all on its ownsome.
  • hank
    edited March 2016
    @Sven,

    Let me clarify that I'm not worried about iCloud security. The issue is related to the auto-lock feature on Apple devices. In the California case, law enforcement is unable to access an IPhones' contents by rapid-firing random code numbers because the unit is set to destroy all contents after 10 unsuccessful attempts. I use this "protect" feature on my iPads. I'm conflicted on whether Apple should design a new program designed specifically to render inactive that security feature as ordered to do. That new program, once created, would make accessing locked devices possible.

    The conflict is in trying to balance national security needs with individual privacy. The new lock-defeat program might not be used only to unlock the iPhone in the California case. More likely, this case would set a precedent allowing law enforcement anywhere to access our devices' stored information. Supposedly, they'd obtain a search warrant first. But the potential for abuse would exist. Didn't want to comment beyond my original post, but thought I should clarify.

    Regards

  • msf
    Pressure by the government to get keys goes back decades. As mentioned in this video, you had the Clipper Chip in the 1990s. But going back even further, you had the government asking (I think it was only asking, not demanding) to prescreen research publications in the 80s, when encryption was more in the academic than commercial sphere.

    I'll go along with Anna and Ben Franklin.

  • hank
    edited March 2016
    John Oliver has some great script writers.:)

    As I ponder this, weak and weary, it does seem raven mad that the best scientific/technological minds our government possesses whose job, among other things, includes protecting the launch codes of our 9,400 nuclear-tipped missles* from hackers, can't figure out how to unlock my $395 IPad. Not sure whether I should feel relieved or terrified at this thought.

    *Siri came up with the 9,400 number.
Sign In or Register to comment.