Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sandeep who wrote (188913)	3/18/2016 12:06:43 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	1 Recommendation Recommended By HerbVic Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213172

Your view conflicts with views of others who are knowledgable on security matters. If you are correct, then the issue is solved easily, except for the fact that it establishes a precedent that Apple would have to create a similar unique software program to be used at any time, on any device specified by law enforcement. This precedent of course would defeat the security benefits that iPhone users now receive. You're right that the issue is related to marketing concerns, but many users or potential users of iPhones see greater security issues that relate to the whole idea of big brother having a right to watch you at any time. That's not in accord with the foundations of U.S. democracy, but it does reveal a certain devolution that in times of stress leads to an acceptance of the principles of an autocratic society. As Churchill stated, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. Art

To: sandeep who wrote (188913)	3/18/2016 2:52:35 PM
From: Heywood40	1 Recommendation Recommended By Bill from Wisconsin Respond to of 213172

Any honest security expert, like perhaps... The former head of the NSA and CIA, General Michael Hayden: He sides with Apple. “I think on balance, America ends up in a less secure place if we somehow weaken what now appears to be very unbreakable encryption in the iPhone.”

To: sandeep who wrote (188913)	3/18/2016 3:36:21 PM
From: pyslent	5 Recommendations Recommended By AJ Muckenfus Art Bechhoefer Bill from Wisconsin JP Sullivan Stock Puppy Respond to of 213172

The court order sets the precedence that Apple can be compelled to make custom software against their wishes as long as what the courts mandates is not explicitly against the law. It is not a power the courts or the FBI should have. Yes, I believe Apple can break into this phone without jeopardizing encryption for all. I believe they would have done it if the FBI had asked nicely, rather than backing them into a corner. Now Apple cannot do it without setting a precedent that gives the All Writs Act more power than was intended.

To: sandeep who wrote (188913)	3/18/2016 3:42:56 PM
From: Pete_Y_48	12 Recommendations Recommended By Bill from Wisconsin BoonDoggler clean86 HerbVic Heywood40 and 7 more members Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213172

the proposal doesn't lead to new security issues What a naive statement. Of course it leads to new security issues, almost too numerous to talk about. First of all the new OS in order to be used for legal purposes has to be vetted by an outside source. which means that Apple looses control of the code. Oh the FBI failed to mention that , didn't they? Then there is China, Russia, Iran, Israel all in line if the code is writhed to get their access. It goes on and on... This is a marketing ploy. As it turns out, the FBi request is also against the law. Twenty years ago CALEA was passed by the US Congress, and there is a section in that bill that specifically prohibits the Government from asking a phone manufacturer to modify either the physical phone or the software. The hearing is going to be very, very interesting, and possibly short. backchannel.com