What are your thoughts on Apple protecting terrorist information?

Apple has been ordered to unlock the San Bernadino shooters iPhone. Apparently the shooter used a security function that erases the the information on the phone after 10 failed tries. For some reason Apple believes they have to create a universal unlock scheme that works across all iPhone models.
Why is Apple going so far to keep terrorist information from the government. This isn't the first time Apple has refused to help law agencise in regards to murder, rape, and child abuse. It's almost like they're an accomplice to the crime or a bystander who videotapes the act and does nothing to help the victim.

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-is-refusing-to-unlock-an-iphone-5s-2015-10

Here's a similar issue with a widow who couldn't remember her dead husbands password:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3407830/Widow-wanted-dead-husband-s-Apple-ID-play-games-iPad-refused-told-COURT-order-instead.html

Apple told her she needed to get a court order in order for them to help her. Once the story went public Apple apologized and aided her in retrieving her password.

TLDR; If you want to commit a crime then do it using an Apple iPhone.

  • Even terrorist, murderers, rapist, and child abusers deserve privacy.
    27% (10)45% (24)38% (34)Vote
  • They should just unlock the phone and stop crying about it.
    73% (27)55% (29)62% (56)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
Updates:
In breaking news John McAfee (developer of the Anti-Virus Software) has offered to unlock the iPhone for free. So just like I've always believed it can be done but Apple just doesn't want to do it (or doesn't want to admit they can't). No universal key needed. Just elite hackers.

0|1
10|31

Most Helpful Guy

  • I am a huge opponent to any form of technology that strips people of their privacy, or prevents them from encrypting private data. So you'd think I would support Apple on this. I don't.

    For one thing, there is a world of difference between installing a back door in ever OS that is accessible wirelessly, and in using specific technology that can hack a phone, via a direct connection, in a forensics lab.

    For another thing, the phone is legally in the hands of the government, and a warrant has been issued to crack it. If the government has legal cause to obtain your property, and a warrant to allow them to access it, then, as simply as that, they have right to legal access. They followed the rule to get what they needed.

    Lastly, the people the phone belonged to? Those fuckers are dead. They have no legal right to any kind of privacy. Rights are for the living.

    If Apple is unwilling to assist in unlocking the phone, in a way that does NOT mandate software or hardware that put all the privacy rights of their customers, then they should face strict fines and censures, and the job should be offered to someone else who can.

    3|3
    0|0

What Guys Said 30

  • They aren't trying to protect the terrorists - they've already given the FBI all of their cloud data.

    Rather, Apple is trying to protect EVERYONE, because if they're forced to give the FBI (or anyone) the tool they're asking for, that tool can be used on ANYONE's phone, and believe me, it will be used in lots of cases that aren't nearly this clear-cut (hell, it will be used in cases that are absolutely NOT okay to do so). Plus, it will eventually leak, and criminals will get it.

    This is Pandora's Box, and once you open it, you can never close it. Apple is completely in the right here.

    None of this data is needed to convict the terrorist - the FBI wants it so they can "learn more", but in all likelihood the data is useless anyway. But none of that is the point - the point is if Apple breaks this security, it will be broken for everyone, forever. That's just the nature of how these things work - and if you don't think the FBI and the rest of the government knows this, you're naive and in denial.

    8|12
    0|0
    • You realize not everything is sent to the cloud right? Pretty you're feeding into the Big Brother scare tactic. Instead of focusing on the terrorist threats you make it about yourself.

    • Show All
    • Yeah I did catch you. You never owned an Apple product yet act like you know how it works. What a hack you are.

    • You talk about emotions but use your fear of the government as the base of your argument.

  • It's called legal precedent. If they create this code, the government can come back and say "you've already got the code and you've used it before, you have no excuse not to use it again." If the code doesn't exist, it can't be abused.

    They also operate in numerous legal jurisdictions. Once they create the code, what's to stop other governments to demand access to it at the threat of prosecution or no longer being allowed to do business. Or they might just steal the code. By making themselves gatekeepers of personal information, they would assume mind-boggling amounts of legal liabilities.

    The encryption algorithm is the same for every iPhone. By its nature, code that can bypass security on one iPhone can bypass the system on every iPhone. That's just how it works. This is not a one-off bit of code they're being asked to write.

    This is like the police wanting to get into a storage container and compelling Masterlock to design a key that can open every padlock in the world and saying "we're only going to use it once, we promise not to abuse it, but you'll just have to take us at our word."

    4|3
    0|0
    • The FBI didn't ask for a universal key program to break all iPhones. They asked for one to unlock one terrorist's phone. Apple implied they want a universal key.

      Every iPhone has a bug Apple can get passed so I'm not buying that universal code must be created.

      Bad example since we know Masterlock can not do such a thing. This however validates that Apple has it in their power to unlock this one phone.

    • Show All
    • Hah, enjoy your false beliefs.

    • You're in IT? Wow. I'm actually the personal assistant to Tim Cook.

  • I agree with Apple on this. The gov needs a court order. If Apple starts giving the government info whenever they ask for it, then privacy and due process goes out the window. It's no different than any other search warrant. If you through out due process then we might as well live in an authoritarian police state.

    In the second case it's a little different. That would actually be part of an estate and go through whatever rules there are in probate. I went through sometimes similar. We had to produce a death certificate, and the executor had to state that the phone was being transferred to my name. However there was no password or private information involved, just the phone and phone number. So it wasn't quite the same.

    1|1
    0|0
    • There is a court order. Apple lost the case.

    • Show All
    • The article is closely related. They are similar cases in two different jurisdictions. I would like to see Apple, or somebody else, appeal. A higher court could rule on the cases separately, or make a broad sweeping ruling for either side.

      I side with Apple on this, in two ways. First the government demanded that Apple comply, but without a court order. That bypasses due process. That is the LEAST that Apple should have fought for, which they did. Then there is a larger question about whether a court can even issue such an order in the first place. That is more borderline, but I still tend to side with Apple. I side with Apple because forcing them to create a back door opens a whole can of worms with potential ramifications in all kind of areas.

      Due process must be maintained. If you throw it out, you might as well throw away all of your freedoms. Due process is what separates something resembling freedom from a totalitarian, authoritarian regime.

    • One is about a drug dealer and another is about a terrorist attack. They rank differently. The FBI does have a court order and Apple still won't comply. I disagree with your statement and side with the FBI.

  • In response to your simplistic and naive opinion that those who oppose are just using a big brother scare tactic (ironic since you are using a terrorist scare tactic to justify your asinine position to take away everyone's rights), and note that, although George Carlin is a comedian, everything he says about what the United States government actually did to Japanese Americans is sadly true. If you don't believe him, do what he says and check it out for yourself.

    http://youtu.be/m9-R8T1SuG4

    0|1
    0|0
    • Simplistic naive opinion? This coming from a guy who re-post a video from a comedian. Okay so first it isn't an opinion because I'm using what was said in the court case. Secondly my update is proof that the phone can be unlocked. Everyone saying Apple has to create a universal key is repeating what Apple wrote. Secondly, you guys turned it into Big Brother versus the people. I like how you choose to ignore the fact this is centered around an actual terrorist attack where 14 people died. You choose to ignore that to validate yourself.

    • Show All
    • 👆labeled a traitor, not terrorist

    • A program they hid? You either weren't paying attention or don't give two F's what is going on around you if you weren't aware of the program. I trust my government more then I trust Apple who doesn't care about their customers or human rights.

      Well the Japanese did bomb Pearl Harbor so the government didn't need to do much for people to be scared of the Japanese. Was the encampment wrong? Yes. But humans do dumb things when their scared. Look at the Syrian refugees. They need somewhere to go yet more then half of America doesn't want to give them access.

      Edward Snowden is a traitor.

  • I don't think people understand what's happening here. The government isn't asking for Apple to unlock just this one phone. They're asking for Apple to modify their software to allow a master key to access any iPhone at will. This seems scary as is, but if you think that that master key won't get stolen within 3 months. Then you're a fool, and know nothing about the robust security flaws all US government agencies have.

    One of my minors is in computer forensics, and I have done contract work with certain intelligent agencies before in the past on data mining. Having said that, opening a backdoor port to your phone is a lot scarier than you think. If the software to which the government wants to have installed is put into place. Then everyone's phone in the world will be subject to attack. This is due to the concept that once a law is set into place that Apple must oblige to. Then android, windows, and all other phones will be subject to the same rulings as well.
    Like I was saying before as well. The US government agencies have horrible security flaws, and it wouldn't take, but a B grade hacker to discover that master key, mimic it, build a program around it, and then either sell it to the highest bidder or God forbid. They make the application open source, and give it out to the public. To which could be as easy as entering in someones phone number, letting the application do it's dirty work, and within hours you'll have full access.

    Deny the idea as much as you want. Incredibly complex encryption is done for a reason, and building something like what the FBI is wanting is incredibly risky. Remember the BP oil spill? Remember how they thought they had it under control before hand? Yeah... that's pretty much what this is. It's not a matter of if something bad will happen, but more or less of when. The only difference between this, and the BP incident is the idea of being able to go backwards. Doing so will be a heck of a lot harder to backtrack.

    1|0
    0|0
    • Read my update and in addition to that the FBI never asked for a universal key. Apple is the only one implying that and everyone else is parroting off what apple wrote in it's letter.

    • Show All
    • To help explain the scenario a little bit further. It's kind of like robbing a bank, but the vault that's currently holding the money has no doors and is completely sealed off on every inch. Thus, the only way to break such a wall would probably be explosives (hacking/brute force extraction), and leading to some of the interior of the vault being damaged by the explosion. Leading to a possibly small, or big percentage of the inside valuables being destroyed in the blast (data).

    • I get that it's better to have some of the data be available rather than none, but the procedure of cracking any devices encryption is never absolute. Therefore leading to a risk of Apple being blamed for losing partial data as well. It's kind of a lose/lose for Apple, and from a security perspective. I completely understand why they're saying no.

  • Good for them. Enough hysteria. What good will it do to have people snooping around their phone now? And it's clear they really want a way to get into EVERY phone, not just this one.

    1|2
    0|0
    • You ask for access to one phone and everyone takes it as meaning every phone.

    • Show All
    • Chuckle, symptoms of dementia.

    • More evidence of your incompetence and receding intelligence.

  • Regardless of what their legal obligation is in this case, I think Apple should show some patriotism on this issue. Apple grew to be the massive, profitable company it is due to the hard work and genius of its founders and others, but also because it was able to take advantage of American freedoms and our economic system. Apple should WANT to help the FBI get the information that's on Syed Farook's iPhone. Who knows what information is there that could help prevent further terrorist attacks? Because don't forget, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik had plans to kill more Americans than just the 14 they did kill. Their mosque had radical ties, and they were undoubtedly part of a larger conspiracy.

    1|0
    0|0
    • Exactly but Apple doesn't seem to have patriotism in it's vocabulary. Also Apple avoids paying large sums of taxes by using corporate entities in Ireland and other countries to lower its tax rate. So this isn't surprising.

  • The authorities don't just want the contents of those particular phones: they want a direct backdoor entry into iphone software:

    www.washingtonpost.com/.../?tid=a_inl

    This concerns thus *every* iphone sold. Not just the San Bernardino killers' phones.

    0|1
    0|0
    • Show All
    • @martyfellow believes homosexuals have AIDS and thus suffer from dementia and are incapable of thinking logically. He only further embarrasses himself by drawing attention to his thread by bickering about. But yes I did block his post because I can no longer have notifications of his bigotry and idiocy flooding my account. Also he decided to talk about AIDS.

  • My thoughts on it are if more people die because of that then that blood is on their hands.

    2|0
    0|0
    • Asker has blocked me from pointing out her ignorance.

    • Show All
    • @Phoenix98 Look at his post if you want. @martyfellow doesn't believe heterosexuals can get AIDS period except through shared needles. Homosexuals having the highest percentage versus all homosexuals having AIDS is a difference. Also the ban on homosexuals not allowed to give blood was lifted by the FDA last year.

    • Lol that's kind of dumb and they seriously they did? *shakes head* idiots.

  • you see where there is the possibility for law officials to exploid devices to get information, there it´s even easier for criminals to do the same thing ( for example the fappening). the American secret agencies are not to be trusted. they exploit their power beyond believe... nsa spies on everybody as it stands and i find it refresing that at least some kompanies don´t give in to that shit...

    you see i understand that this is a bad thing because how are we supposed to solve the crime now? i don´t know the answer to that but what i know is that my trust in the law enforcement offices and secret agencies has been destroyed.

    why sould everybody give up their privacy in order to find "some" criminals?

    0|1
    0|0
    • I still chuckle when I hear/see the fappening lmao.

    • Show All
    • The social media app "kik" allowed law enforcement access to a college students account who killed a high school student. Yet I don't see users leaving "kik" because of that. Proven terrorist don't deserve common courtesy for privacy.

      Once again your underestimating Apple.

    • kik doesn´t sell you privacy though xD

  • they need to just do it

    2|0
    0|0
  • "Even terrorist, murderers, rapist and child abusers deserve privacy"
    Nice twisting of words.

    If the FBI forces Apple to make the backdoor for the iPhone, then the government will be able to hack into EVERY iPhone in the world.

    Mass surveillance is about intimidating enemies of the state. I can give some examples.
    -----> The government knows you're going to a protest before you arrive, and are arrested, kettled or water cannoned as soon as you get there.
    -----> You look at drug websites then your post has little tiny cuts on them.
    -----> You read RVF and then end up on a government watch list.
    -----> Jacob Appelbaum, Tor programmer being intimidated by the government
    -----> Glenn Greenwald having his laptop seized at the airport when he tries to leave the country
    -----> You make a joke about women or homosexuals then you get arrested.
    -----> You look at tax and investment websites, then your bank account sends all your personal data and entire purchase history from when you opened the account, to a credit report company which profits off personal information and sells it to other companies. (Barclays wanted to do this to me but I refused.)

    ISIS and terrorists don't use western communications anyway. I don't know why anyone thinks they do.

    Then the iPhone hacking technology will fall into the hands of oppressive totalitarian governments like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Maybe regular plebs like you and me will get the technology too or cybercriminals.

    0|0
    0|0
    • It's not twisting words. If you support Apple then you support these people's rights.

      "ISIS and terrorists don't use western communications anyway. I don't know why anyone thinks they do." That has to be the dumbest most uninformed thing yet. ISIL uses every form of communication to spread their word and get recruits. That is fact and can be seen all over the web and news.

      I see paranoia has a strong hold on you.

    • It's not paranoia. It's a fact. Governments abuse human rights and the constitution all the time. You must be retarded if you think that terrorists are going to use Facebook, Twitter and Gmail to plan terrorism.

    • You must be retarded to ignore the actual cases where they have used them.

  • The trouble is, if you leave a back door for the FBI, ANYONE can find and exploit it. Bye bye bank account.

    1|2
    0|0
    • Hackers can get into your unlocked phones anyway through wifi. I don'the see people worrying about that.

  • I commend apple for standing up for our rights

    1|4
    0|0
    • Are you a terrorist? Because you "our".

    • Show All
    • techcrunch.com/.../
      google , facebook, Microsoft and many more we probably don't know about.
      www.thedailybeast.com/.../...rough-front-door.html
      Check the dates on some of these articles as well. This is the type of information I keep up with so I have known for a while how bad the intelligence agencies want an end to encryption and back doors built in for them.
      Which is also why I believe apple and not the intelligence agencies.
      Again if these agencies can hack into the phone anyway. Why do they need apple?
      There is no purpose to get apple involved as they can access the phone with their own resources.
      The hack would unlock all iphones. As it would allow authorities unlimited attempts to enter a password without the phone locking down and encrypting itself. This is what they wanted apple to build for them. Again I don't see the point in these as you say skilled hackers could get into this phone for them. The gov def employs people skilled enough to do it.

    • Believe or not most government agencies want to go through proper channels. But if they meet resistances then they'll find another way. Hence hiring a third party.

  • The government is overreaching. Today a terrorist, tomorrow a cop who wants to erase a video you took of him beating or killing somebody.

    0|3
    0|0
    • This comment is overreaching. Scare tactic accomplished.

    • Show All
    • @AmongTheApples Please quote my scare tactic.

    • What's it like being so easily scared and controlled?

  • The FBI is just going to come back with a warrant.
    unlock the damn phone

    1|0
    0|0
    • They have a warrant and court order. Apple is still refusing.

    • Show All
    • A judge handed out a verdict: money.cnn.com/.../

  • I'm on the fence about it. On one hand, I want Apple to comply so that we can go after the criminals who deserve to rot in jail. But on the other hand, I want us citizens to be free of surveillance. It's creepy to have someone watching everything you do and possibly frame you for a crime that you never and don't have any intention of committing.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I feel known criminals especially those known to possibly be involved with terror like intentions deserve no rights on any level.
    Part of where this Democratic, ethical society just irks me..

    2|0
    0|0
  • The problem with Apple giving the government unrestricted access is that it sets a legal precedent. Suddenly, it becomes pick and choose what is allowed to remain private. And what about accusations? How many want their phones made available to authorities because somebody else thinks they're doing something illegal. It's not about protecting terrorists from police. It's about protecting citizens from abuses of government power made in the name of "national security".

    0|0
    0|0
  • It wouldn't be just protecting terrorist info but info for everyone. Anyways I never heard about this.

    1|0
    0|0
    • Everyone includes terrorist, rapist, murderers, child abusers. But they only want access to one confirmed terrorists phone.

  • Support Apple on this. If essentially design a backdoor to circumvent their own security and encryption for ONE iphone, then that same technology can (and WILL) be applied to ALL iphones and in the process rendering Apple's security and encryption as completely worthless. Wake up people, Edward Snowden was and is absolutely correct about the trustworthiness of your own government.

    0|2
    0|0
    • Oh my gosh. Another Edward Snowden fanatic.

    • @Asker there are a lot of us out there. You are a 1984 big brother fanatic.

    • @Fugue A lot of Edward Snowden fanatic/ fan boy. Clearly. Also referencing George Orwell's 1984 proves you haven't read it. You would be the 1984 Big Brother fanatic since you believe the FBI is asking Apple for a universal key to unlock your phone.

  • Why is this question under Sexual Behavior?

    2|1
    0|0
    • Great question. I tried changing it twice but GAG listed it under "Sexual Behavior".

  • The govenrment is a much bigger threat to a citizens freedom and rights than terrorists IMHO.

    I mean don't get me wrong, terrorism is a threat.
    But if you think that the government and big corporations are a lesser threat then you probably know nothing about them.

    1|0
    0|0
    • Then move to Syria and tell me how it works out for you. Better yet tell the thousands of refugees leaving their homes that.

    • Funny that you picked Syria as an example. Because there in fact people are running from both the terrorists, the dictatorship government and the local rebels.

    • Funny you still refuse to live there.

  • A lot of people use apple and if someone gets their hands on this key then a lot more crime will happen...

    0|0
    0|0
    • It's not a universal key that is being requested. Apple is the only one implying that.

    • Show All
    • Well one key for one phone. The FBI isn't even requesting Apple to give them a key but to just unlock the phone and hand it back over. Apple can keep said key.

    • They want to show there is no key... would you take the same path if someone showed you a shortcut?

  • I don't buy their products, but it's wise to stand behind their product and not build back doors into their encryption algorithms.

    0|0
    0|0
  • It just shows how influential Apple is. It has the US government in its pocket on this occasion.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Shows more that Apple doesn't give two bean flicks who you are.

  • Unlock the phone. Terrorists don't deserve rights.

    0|0
    0|0
  • You're not a biased asshole.

    0|0
    0|0
  • That article about the woman was his Apple ID password, not the passcode to unlock the iPad. Apple can retrieve your Apple ID but there's no way to unlock an individual iPhone's passcode while still preserving the data on the phone's hard drive. It would have to be created and if it's created they could use it on ANY Apple device.

    1|0
    0|0
    • And here lies the issue. The assumption that Apple has to create a universal key to unlock one phone.

    • Show All
    • Yet the only moron here believes every thing out of Apples mouth and attacks everyone outside of Apple who proves they are lying. Then post a YouTube video to voice another opinion.

    • Nobody has proven that Apple is lying. On the other hand there is plenty of evidence that Apple is not lying. Tech blogs everywhere explain this not just this YouTube guy. You can find the proof but if you're too stupid to look or just don't want to read the truth, that's on you.

  • They are not supporting terrorism. They just don't want to create something where the government can just tap into anyone's phone at any time.

    1|3
    0|0
    • Where did the FBI say they want a universal key program? No where. Apple implied that. The FBI just wants access to one phone.

    • Show All
    • @martyfellow

      That happens to cowards that can't think for themselves. They can only regurgitate what the media tells them to be offended by. Any actual opinion that requires brain power they don't have and they start blocking people.

    • @Luv2BRealExotic13 Not only do you regurgitate what Apple says hence your comment "what the media tells them" but you also agree with the guy saying offensive comments about homosexuals. Wonderful.

What Girls Said 10

  • Like everyone has already said, they would have to create a universal back door that could be applied to every and any iphone. That might not be what the FBI specifically asked for but that is the only thing Apple is capable of doing in this scenario. If you only needed one key code for that specific phone, then the FBI would be able to do it themselves with their own hackers. But that's obviously not the case since they need the help of Apple. And Apple has realized that the only way to create such a backdoor, is by making it universal. In the wrong hands, this tool could and would be devastating. Think more terror attacks.

    0|1
    0|0
    • Not necessarily. Apple was the creator so they should have more incite into the phone then the FBI. Also Apple hasn't even attempted to unlock the phone. They're presuming they need to make a universal key.

    • I think Apple are pretty on top of things when it comes to knowing what they can and can't do... they wouldn't publish a public statement before taking all options into consideration.
      All iphones have the same type of encrypted system so naturally, if you find a backdoor into that system, it will automatically mean you have a backdoor into every single iphone because they all share the same type of encryption.

    • Based on Apples history they jump to conclusions pretty easily and alter the truth to make themselves look better.

  • Holy shit that function actually works? No way. If they don't have a warrant and court order signed and sanctioned by a federal judge than they gets no entry. Apple still has to uphold to their security standards bc a lot of people rely on them. Anything where personal privacy and finances are involved it's handled with the upmost precautionary procedures. This is the constitution no matter who they are. As a scenario, you want to give permission if you were accused of something or they had the wrong person you want anyone (let's say a dirty cop trying to cover his tracks) to hack into your phone willy-nilly seize it, and do whatever else they want with your information to frame you further? Don't tell me you wouldn't care bc then you're just an idiot trying to bluff. The Feds aren't gonna get anything unless he backed up the phone on his computer anyway. In this case Apple is doing the right thing.

    1|1
    0|0
    • You have to read the article I provided. The FBI has a warrant and got a court order.
      According to Apple, "Apple customers have no rights under the end user license agreement (EULA) – except to use the software in ways approved by Apple". Here's another scenario. You have a stalker who has killed a loved one and everything to connect him to the crime is on his iPhone. However, the police and prosecutors can't access it so their is no evidence to connect him to the crime. So he is set free. Are you okay with that? "Don't tell me you wouldn't care bc then you're just an idiot trying to bluff". In a real case scenario we have two confirmed terrorist with one iPhone that has their future terrorist plans and more then likely information on American terrorist cells. Yet you're okay with Apple preventing the FBI from getting this information to protect more lives. Apple is not doing the right thing.

    • Show All
    • I quote because you for some reason like to pretend like you forgot what you wrote. Yet covering my sources in your mind is seen as petty and looney. If I were to search your GAG history then your saying I would not find one instance where you quoted someone or attacked someone for quoting.

      I have no idea what I'm talking about? All you can do is spout that Governor Snyder is a baby killer. Really? I bet you have no idea how many people have died or what caused it. I doubt you actually care though. You seem to be one of those people who through random human rights violations at people to minimize another crime. Pretty much saying the 14 dead peoples lives don't matter. It's also more interesting you bring up the militia in Oregon. Even though what they're doing is illegal you stated you don't care about the FBI or law enforcement. Well neither do they. Hence they took over the property. You'd fit in with them since they're anti-government.

    • You aren't just pro-terrorist but pro-you. It's sad when someone who doesn't care about the people in flint or the victims of the Iraq war use their suffering to deflect from an argument as scapegoat.

      "So you're mad bc I basically won this argument and you can't think faster than me. You're the laughs. Thank you I am quite entertained right now by your struggle and aspirations to become and intellectual informed member of society. Keep trying but don't hurt yourself too much dear."

      The desperate cry of a girl crying behind her keyboard. You feel this is a race to be one by naming the most human rights and crimes violations. Pathetic. This however shows your true desperate cries " I am quite entertained right now by your struggle and aspirations to become and intellectual informed member of society". Whenever someone writes that they are clearly bothered but pretend to not be. It helps cover their pain. Be a better person moving forward.

  • My understanding, is that the FBI wants Apple to write them a backdoor program.

    Once that was in the possession of the FBI, they could use it whenever they wanted, on any apple device.

    So.. While yes, Apple is protecting an accepted criminal in this instance, they are doing it, to protect the millions of innocents that use their products.

    The thing I don't really get is...

    Doesn't the NSA track everything already?

    0|1
    0|0
    • Yeah but not a universal one like Apple is implying. Apple is praying on the fears of millions of Apple iPhone users that the government will hack their phones whenever for no reason at all. They are great at manipulation.

      No, that program was shut down after the outcry from the Snowden incident. However, that was different where the NSA was listening to conversations. The FBI needs the info on the phone.

    • If it is simply just the info on one phone only, could the FBI not get a court order?

    • They did and Apple is still refusing. The judge has given Apple five days to comply.

  • You know, it would be a lot easier if we could just assume everyone is guilty until proven innocent. That constitution is so effing inconvenient. Why not just shoot everyone right now and let God sort it out later.

    0|1
    0|0
    • So you're siding with the San Bernadino shooters right to privacy?

    • Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    • So that's a roundabout way of saying yes.

  • It could lead to the collection of unwarranted information, i. e., think Mapp vs. Ohio. Say you're looking for evidence of credit card fraud on someone's phone & you find child porn, then that opens up another can of worms regarding what they have a warrant for or not.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I think Apple is in the wrong here for sure.

    1|0
    0|0
  • @Apple24 , why are you protecting terrorist information >:( :P?

    1|0
    0|0
  • If they break the law, the phone should be unlocked.

    1|0
    0|0
  • You don't understand the full affect. If Apple gives them an algorithm to hack their stuff, then the government can reverse engineer a mechanism to spy on every single iphone in the country. Right to privacy is implied in the constitution according to the current Supreme Court justices.

    0|0
    0|0
    • The FBI and the Judge never requested Apple to give them an algorithm. They requested for Apple to unlock the phone. That's it.

    • Show All
    • I'm saying you're incorrect. The government wants the key so they can figure out how to make a machine that does the same thing.

    • And I'm saying your wrong. Clearly this will keep going back and fourth.

  • they should unlock this phone, why is the problem with that really? Protecting people is a lot more immortal than privacy

    0|0
    0|0
Loading...