Archive

Hey Apple, Google, Microsoft...

  • Glory Days
    Also, maybe its just me, but has anyone known someone to truly have their phone hacked? Besides some celeb nudes, I dont recall phone hacking to be a problem.
  • Rotinaj
    I wonder why you don't recall it being much of a problem......
  • raiderbuck
    If you're an employer, and you give out lockable phones. You should probably have MobileIron (or something similar):

    http://news.yahoo.com/common-software-let-fbi-unlock-160352000.html
  • sleeper
    Glory Days;1782693 wrote:Yeah, its a system thing that they can upload from their computer onto that single phone direct via a cable, not some over the air update. you are telling me Apple does not have that capability in their lab?
    They may be able to do it for just one phone but the reality is once they do it for this phone then they will be asked to do it on more phones as needed. Then you bring up the vulnerability that hackers know it can be done and will start looking to see how Apple did it and replicate it.

    The current way it is designed makes it very hard to hack. Apple should continue to dig in its heels.
  • Glory Days
    sleeper;1782724 wrote:They may be able to do it for just one phone but the reality is once they do it for this phone then they will be asked to do it on more phones as needed. Then you bring up the vulnerability that hackers know it can be done and will start looking to see how Apple did it and replicate it.

    The current way it is designed makes it very hard to hack. Apple should continue to dig in its heels.
    how would hackers ever find out that code if that one phone, or any phone Apple assist the FBI with in the future, stays in evidence or even in Apple custody. Its next to impossible unless they physically break into an FBI evidence room or Apple lab like some mission impossible heist. AND if that is possible where they could recreate the code, couldn't hackers just write their own code right now to circumvent the password requirement?
  • Glory Days
    Rotinaj;1782708 wrote:I wonder why you don't recall it being much of a problem......
    About as much of a problem as voter fraud? imaginary fear? I mean, if a hacker wanted your bank account etc, there are probably about 10 easier ways to get it besides someone's phone.
  • Glory Days
    Bill Gates says Apple should unlock the San Bernardino iPhone
    http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/22/11096888/bill-gates-apple-fbi-iphone

    Pew Poll:
    51% support unlocking the phone
    38% says Apple should not
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/apple-fbi-poll-should-apple-unlock-san-bernardino-terrorists-iphone/
  • Belly35
    Give me .... Give me I m sorry Feds but nothing is free
    you paid for a hacked website Obamacare, Sercurity issues at NASA and even the FBI been hacked ... Nothing free
    their a cost of doing business in the real world .... Make Apple an offer but to just say, Give me
    I don't want the Feds to have anything ... You pay Apple to develop the software and operational hex and Apple keeps the software ... You Feds have to come to Apple paying Apple for its services to use their software you paid for.. Because you can't be trusted ...
  • sleeper
    Glory Days;1782875 wrote:how would hackers ever find out that code if that one phone, or any phone Apple assist the FBI with in the future, stays in evidence or even in Apple custody. Its next to impossible unless they physically break into an FBI evidence room or Apple lab like some mission impossible heist. AND if that is possible where they could recreate the code, couldn't hackers just write their own code right now to circumvent the password requirement?
    Because eventually, once the tool is created, someone will ask for it with the intention of copying it and sending out on the black market for the highest price. Security is a one time mistake and losing the trust of your customers can cost billions. Apple is not in the business of creating white hat tools for the government.
  • raiderbuck
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones-1456202213

    If anyone has a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, this was posted today. Sounds like the Feds want access to more than one phone. So much for "just this one phone" defense. Are all of these a matter of national security? I doubt it.
  • Fab4Runner
    Glory Days;1782880 wrote:
    Pew Poll:
    51% support unlocking the phone
    38% says Apple should not
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/apple-fbi-poll-should-apple-unlock-san-bernardino-terrorists-iphone/
    The majority of people are idiots...shocking.
  • Heretic
  • sherm03
    Glory Days;1782880 wrote:Bill Gates says Apple should unlock the San Bernardino iPhone
    http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/22/11096888/bill-gates-apple-fbi-iphone
    No he didn't. They misconstrued his words. Check the update in the same article you posted:
    Update 9:40am ET: Bill Gates stated on Bloomberg TV this morning that reports about his supporting the FBI's fight against Apple were misrepresented, saying "that doesn't state my view on this."
  • Belly35
    raiderbuck;1782900 wrote:http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones-1456202213

    If anyone has a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, this was posted today. Sounds like the Feds want access to more than one phone. So much for "just this one phone" defense. Are all of these a matter of national security? I doubt it.
    The Feds screwing around with Hillary e mail for national security breach and can't /won't do jack about that issue but want Apple to provide software to them for the reason of????? Eat shit Feds... you can be trusted nor can you protect the American population ..
  • Laley23
    Belly man, I love your posts, but Jesus I haven't been able to decided a damn one in over a month. Lol
  • SportsAndLady
    Actually that last one was one of belly's bests lol
  • Heretic
    Yeah, I got that one!!!!!!

    To paraphrase/translate for you, Laley: "If the feds can't get through Hillary's emails that potentially/probably involve a national security breach and do something about that, why should a company bend over backwards to comply with them for reasons that may or may not wind up untrustworthy? GFY, FBI, GFY."
  • Laley23
    SportsAndLady;1782928 wrote:Actually that last one was one of belly's bests lol
    It was. The rest on this thread...lol
  • Belly35
    Laley23;1782921 wrote:Belly man, I love your posts, but Jesus I haven't been able to decided a damn one in over a month. Lol
    it in code
  • Belly35
    Heretic;1782930 wrote:Yeah, I got that one!!!!!!

    To paraphrase/translate for you, Laley: "If the feds can't get through Hillary's emails that potentially/probably involve a national security breach and do something about that, why should a company bend over backwards to comply with them for reasons that may or may not wind up untrustworthy? GFY, FBI, GFY."
    nailed it
  • Glory Days
    sleeper;1782895 wrote:Because eventually, once the tool is created, someone will ask for it with the intention of copying it and sending out on the black market for the highest price. Security is a one time mistake and losing the trust of your customers can cost billions. Apple is not in the business of creating white hat tools for the government.
    again, impossible unless someone from Apple leaks it. Which, technically, someone at Apple with knowledge of the code writing could do that now and sell it on the black market. This request by the FBI changes nothing.

    Also, the government already requires private businesses to comply with legal law enforcement request in situations such as wiretaps. If AT&T came out with a way to 100% secure all cell phone conversations, they would be breaking the law if they didn't provide a "backdoor" so that the communications could be intercepted by law enforcement.
    In response to concerns that emerging technologies such as digital and wireless communications were making it increasingly difficult for law enforcement agencies to execute authorized surveillance, Congress enacted CALEA on October 25, 1994. CALEA requires a "telecommunications carrier," as defined by the CALEA statute, to ensure that equipment, facilities, or services that allow a customer or subscriber to "originate, terminate, or direct communications," enable law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance pursuant to court order or other lawful authorization. CALEA is intended to preserve the ability of law enforcement agencies to conduct electronic surveillance by requiring that telecommunications carriers and manufacturers of telecommunications equipment design and modify their equipment, facilities, and services to ensure that they have the necessary surveillance capabilities as communications network technologies evolve. Communications services utilizing Circuit Mode equipment and facilities, and communications services utilizing packet mode are all subject to CALEA. In May 2006, the FCC issued a Second Report and Order also requiring facilities-based broadband Internet access providers and providers of interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service to come into compliance with CALEA obligations no later than May 14, 2007.
    I think it would be pretty easy to craft this law to apply to the current Apple situation.
  • Glory Days
    sherm03;1782911 wrote:No he didn't. They misconstrued his words. Check the update in the same article you posted:
    I stand corrected, thanks.
  • Glory Days
    raiderbuck;1782900 wrote:http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones-1456202213

    If anyone has a subscription to the Wall Street Journal, this was posted today. Sounds like the Feds want access to more than one phone. So much for "just this one phone" defense. Are all of these a matter of national security? I doubt it.
    The problem now is the Feds are just going to pile on to pressure them. My department has already been asked to go back and look for cases where it is a similar situation. Like I said earlier, the repercussions are much worse if Apple fights and loses, than if they quietly complied with the request.
  • Glory Days
    Belly35;1782912 wrote:The Feds screwing around with Hillary e mail for national security breach and can't /won't do jack about that issue but want Apple to provide software to them for the reason of????? Eat shit Feds... you can be trusted nor can you protect the American population ..
    Flip this(for devil's advocate purposes), Apple is providing secure communication devices to terrorists. how do you feel knowing that a US company has created a way for terrorist to discuss and plan terrorist attacks against the US?

    Also, Hillary's emails are the least of my worries when it comes to national security. Even though I think its not right what she did, I have yet to see one email that actually discloses any national security information.