[PRIVACY] The Encryption War Just Got Real - Comments Page 2

I'm sick and tired of people standing by letting the government usurp the Constitution and steal away the liberties and freedoms that millions of our servicemen have shed their blood and given their lives to preserve. Give the politicians/lawyers an inch just gives them the opening to grab more of our freedoms. What politician has ever been completely honest?

I See both sides, but I think it's a bell that will never even slightly be able to be "unrung" if it's allowed.

Part of Winston's Churchill's favorite poems seems apt in this instance. Written by Edwin J. Milliken

"Who is in charge of the clattering train?
The axles creak, and the couplings strain.
...
For the pace is hot, and the points are near,
And Sleep hath deadened the driver's ear;
And signals flash through the night in vain.
Death is in charge of the clattering train!"

Apple as a company has hit a new low. They believe that they are above the law. They have been legally requested to unlock their phone and must comply.

To say that they do not have the knowledge to unlock their product is just there way of saying they do not want to help.

Apple is a company that moves Billions of dollars out of the US to avoid paying taxes, there values are not those of the US.

Apple is a supporter of terrorism, how many American have to die in the name of Apples values.

Have to agree with TJC, and in an election year all the dogs want to get off the porce and chase the mail carrier.

Seriously, terrorists? Really, Timothy McVeigh was home grown, a terroist and didn't need a cell phone. The tragedy in NY wasn't cell phone related either. If there is a will, there's a way and going after Apple is good PR.

So the phones are encrypted. What I'm more concerned about as a law-abiding citizen has been the erosion of my right to privacy, instead of that right being upheld by my own government.

Quite an interesting conundrum. I see 4 sides, all with their own polarized views:

1) The Government can't be trusted. Period.
2) The "Slippery Slope" concept, give an inch and
you are at the bottom of the hill in Hell.
2a)Dash-IS-ISIS gets the phones and we are screwed.
3) The entire financial well being of the US rests
upon the use of cell phones.

I also find it interesting that NO ONE HAS SEEMED TO HAVE READ BOB'S LINK OUT TO THE ORDER, or looked up what the heck the "Writs Act of 1789" is and what it was meant to do.

Is no one out-raged that EVERY telephone call you make and EVERY e-mail you have sent or will send is going to be stored be stored in Utah - forever (or longer than your grand children will probably live).

Had you read the order you would see that even the Judge who issued it, has reservations about doing so -- and did anyone catch the fact that Apple may not even OWN the device, thus have no right to comply - it's like your neighbor giving cops permission to search your house, or YOU giving cops permission to search a car which you sold to someone else (or being compelled under threat of fine and imprisonment to give consent, and that consent becomes valid in the eyes of the law - so cops can search YOUR care ANYTIME after it is sold to someone else)?

I also find it VERY revealing that people focus on the use of cell phones to cripple the financial institutions of this country (or any other) and NOT consider that the destruction of the infrastructure - power, gas, water, transportation, would cripple us FAR worse? Is MONEY the only thing that people focus on? How unspeakably sad.

Perhaps we should look to our 'Heroes' -- those who played in the 'water-ponds' and 'sand boxs' for the 'good' of our country - and STAND BEHIND THEM -- Freedom Is Not Free. Many parrot that quote with no idea what it means without universal compulsory conscription -- You don't have to be a USMC member to be 'All-American' - you just have to believe that they (believe they) are fighting for your freedom. Even if they don't. Do your part, and at least PRETEND that they are because freedom and liberty are

1) "“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” -- Ben Franklin ---

" Those who would sacrifice freedom for the sake of SECURITY deserve neither " A statement that ALL should consider. REMEMBER this, the more you give to the government the more you become a slave.

Law enforcement is using another 'ends justifies the means' argument. That makes them no better than the people they are trying to catch. Enough is enough. In balancing Freedom against Security, Freedom MUST win or we all might as well just become indentured servants to the Government and the 1% who seem to be running it now.

Apple vs USA: Observations:
1. I have a lot more fear of the US Federal government than I do of terrorists.
2. How does the cadaver of a dead terrorist have privacy rights?
3. This phone was property of school district, so
it looks like the FBI just struck out on this one.
A law requiring employees to register the passwords (etc.) of their company issued phones with the owning employer would resolve this matter.

Things are a bit complicated here, but I don't think it is helpful to dismiss concerns about "drug dealers, terrorists, and human traffickers" as concerns about "bogeymen."

Appears that some of these poster ay be hackers and are hoping Apple looses. I dislike Apple with there over priced electronics, but they are right in this case .Washington has been wanting to become a dictatorship for several years, would be one more step.Thank you hope they win.

For the sake of argument let's say that an iPhone was apprehended by the FED and it was absolutely known to be the trigger for a planted smart bomb somewhere in the heart of NYC (or any other major metropolitan city). But alas, the owner was killed in its apprehension. 1) whose privacy would be violated if the owner is dead, and 2) how many lives are worth the preservation of this phone's encryption? I know this is a theoretical question and there may be objections to the premise. But if it is wrong to exercise "free speech" by yelling "fire" in a dark, crowded theater (because doing so jeopardizes lives), is it not also wrong to preserve privacy when doing so also jeopardizes lives? Besides all this, I do NOT believe that there does not already exist a way into that phone. A friend of mine's wife passed away leaving behind an iPad that was "locked" and he could not access it. But he turned it over to the tech dept at a local college and received it back in a few days open and gushing it innards. Somebody (Apple) already knows how to open that phone. Don't kid yourself.

Historically politicians cannot be trusted, they are human and corruptible and therefore governments are corruptible, so I see Apples point, but Apple would be serving the law the country and the population better by decrypting a specific phone on the direction of a judge who usually has a very good reason.
A refusal and the following court case where the law is usually a blinkered Ass, could mean all phones in the future being left open to compromisation, what I mean is by being obstructive Apple and therfor other phone makers could come off a lot worse.

A hot topic indeed. I get the impression that many of the responders to this have not actually read Bob's article very well. Many appear to have missed the point that Apple have deliberately designed their system so that it cannot be decrypted without the password. What I read was that decryption on this device is currently a technically impossible task regardless of court orders, law suits or anybodies desire to do so.

I am no fan of Apple but I cheer them in this case. I hope they are not forced by our government to create this and open the phone. I know the situation that occurred was horrendous. However, I don't see what more information can be obtained that will be helpful now. I hate to see our "freedoms" eroding away, bit by bit, in the name of "security". There is no true security. I prefer to take my chances with fate, since that is what we all do anyway.

This I thought was already happening..."to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.”

"to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.”

Is this not the basis for Windows 10?

EDITOR'S NOTE: Umm, no. There's nothing in Windows 10 that does anything like that.

Apple needs to act like Trump: Agree to open the phone for the next President, as long as the current President does not fill the SCOTUS vacancy.

Personally, if I were a terrorist, I would have erased the damn thing before I threw it in the lake.

For some reason, I have never owned an Apple product, but I got to say Tim Cook, you won my vote with this one, I'm definitively an Apple fan now!

I read the phone was actually owned by the state government that the terrorist worked for, this should teach all government, and or businesses, that supplies cell phones to their employees, to make sure they input the passwords and figure a way that they cannot be changed by the employees. If you are an employee using a business cellphone, you have no right to privacy on that phone.

I understand the controversy over Apples encryption of their devices and the perceived threat by some individuals over the threat to national security. However, you must remember that the greatest violation to the United States, i.e. 9/11, was perpetrated by paper and oral communication. What I am saying is that, even if backdoors are allowed, it will not necessarily reduce the terrorist threat that is prevalent.

Looking from the outside at the US, would I trust your govt. or law enforcement organisations? I don't trust my own govt., and I'd trust yours even less.

I'm with Apple on this. You worry about terrorism yet far more people die on the roads from drunk drivers but you don't allow random breath testing.