US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2968

On February 20 2016 05:30 Plansix wrote:
From what I was reading yesterday, the vibe from the tech industry was that supported encryption and making it as secure as possible. But a couple of articles pointed out that Apple moved very aggressively and created an encryption system that would guarantee the government would sue them. Specifically because the phone auto deletes if they attempt to open it and that can’t be turned off. The tech industry is not so keen on that because it could force regulation or legislation.

I’m mixed on it. I think encryption is very important. I don’t think I am comfortable with companies should build mass market devices that are so secure legislators might need to regulate them. Or that no one can open expect the user. Or at least, not on a phone that sells millions of units each year internationally.

Edit; Market Place from yesterday made a good point, that Apple planned to have this happen a long time ago. To not be the gate keeper for Iphones. It was a business decision to make their product more valuable. They knew this fight was coming and likely planned around it. And that the product might sell better internationally if it was see as so secure even the US government couldn’t get it.

On February 20 2016 07:21 Simberto wrote:
Related question for people who know more about this kind of thing then i do, because this has been bugging me.

So, i do have a question here: Shouldn't there be some way for the FBI to simply completely copy everything that is on that phone, encryption or not, and thus be able to try as often as they want anyways? The data must be saved on some sort of storage device, so couldn't you just take that storage out of the phone, and 1 : 1 copy it over?

I assume there must be some sort of protection in the style of "If the storage has no electricity, it deletes itself. If you open the phone, it deletes itself, etc.. But people who are able to defuse bombs should be able to figure out something along those lines? Drill some holes at the right place, cut the right wires, things like that. And they don't have to try it on that phone either, simply practice on an identical phone until you are sure you get it right all the time. And as soon as you are able to replicate the whole storage of the phone, you should be able to brute force it no matter what it thinks about that.

Obviously it doesn't work like that, or we wouldn't have this situation. Is it simply that the FBI does not want to risk losing the phone by fucking up such an attempt? Or is there something else in place that prevents this kind of action?

On February 20 2016 07:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:


But then you have to consider why the US government not being able to spy is so valuable. We wouldn't need these features if government bodies weren't invading privacy while breaking their own regulations.

The idea that you can regulate encryption is laughable as well. Unless you plan on going North Korea and preventing people from accessing how to do it then your efforts will be fruitless. The regulation would be even less effective than prohibition.

On February 20 2016 07:43 Acrofales wrote:


Fairly certain they don't. If they did, they would probably have gotten a court order to do that, instead of trying to mangle an 18th century law into forcing Apple to write a backdoor for them. Not a lawyer here, but I trust the FBI has some pretty sharp lawyers who analyse the best way of getting this done.

On February 20 2016 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:


It's gonna happen. Hilary is gonna be such a mess after people like GH trying to spur a revolution that we're gonna get steamrolled by Rubio.

On February 20 2016 04:22 Gorsameth wrote:

Fortunately for Hillary it is unlikely that Bernie will take his gloves off.


This is indeed a much bigger threat. If Bernie loses a large portion of Democrats may not turn out to vote for Hillary, not so much because of herself but because of their own disappointment.

On February 20 2016 07:56 Plansix wrote:

Not spying good and that is what encryption should do. I support people having encryption that deters and prevents spying. I am not convinced it needs to be so strong that even when the FBI had the phone, went through the legal process to receive approval to open the phone, they still cannot open it. And no one can turn of the safety measures to prevent it from destroying the evidence. I am not convinced that is the only way we can be safe from government spying.

And I don't think Apple is a group of saints who are on the side of the angels. There is likely a market internationally for a phone the US government can't get into.

On February 20 2016 08:23 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:

There is no mild variety of security like there is hot sauce. Either the device is secure or it isn't. The problem is that the FBI having a legal channel to access it means anyone else can also use that channel, legally or illegally.

“Put it in a museum; let it go.”
“That’s Donald trump supporting Nikki Haley removing the battle flag from the confederate memorial in Columbia."
"Respect whatever it is you have to respect, because it was a point in time, and put it in a museum."
"People like Donald Trump are always butting their noses into other people's business, but Trump talks about our flag like it’s a social disease."
"Respect whatever it is you have to respect. Let it go; put it in a museum."
"Donald Trump has bankrolled nearly every Democrat in the country. He’s funded our enemies. He’s ridiculed our values."
"Respect whatever it is you have to respect. Let it go; put it in a museum."
"On Saturday send Donald Trump and his New York values back to Manhattan. Ted Cruz for president. Let’s take our country back now—before it’s too late."

On February 20 2016 08:12 OuchyDathurts wrote:
There is a market for a phone that no government can get into.

On February 20 2016 08:32 Plansix wrote:

Of course their is. But the US government doesn't have to allow them to be made or sold to anyone in the world, including other world governments. There is no reason for the US to be super pumped about Apple selling these phones over seas. If Apple intentionally doesn't make a key to the the encryption because they don't want to be forced to provide it via court order, the government could they are not longer allowed to sell it. And if 3rd party apps are available on the Iphone provided it, the government could regulate the store too.

The CS tech sector has been allowed to innovate on the internet and cell phone networks with very little regulation by the government and it has been good for everyone involved. But there are limits. That is why I am conflicted about what Apple is doing by saying they won't want to play ball any more. Because the US government could just say "fine, now we are going to regulate what software you can put on your products."

On February 20 2016 08:32 Plansix wrote:

Of course there is. But the US government doesn't have to allow them to be made or sold to anyone in the world, including other world governments. There is no reason for the US to be super pumped about Apple selling these phones over seas. If Apple intentionally doesn't make a key to the the encryption because they don't want to be forced to provide it via court order, the government could they are not longer allowed to sell it. And if 3rd party apps are available on the Iphone provided it, the government could regulate the store too.

The CS tech sector has been allowed to innovate on the internet and cell phone networks with very little regulation by the government and it has been good for everyone involved. But there are limits. That is why I am conflicted about what Apple is doing by saying they won't want to play ball any more. Because the US government could just say "fine, now we are going to regulate what software you can put on your products."

On February 20 2016 08:35 Gorsameth wrote:

And public opinion is going to slap them in their face when they try to take people's Iphones away from them.

The only ones at fault here are the intelligence agencies who pissed the well so bad that no one trusts them anymore to actually act responsibly if they are given access.

Sanders Accepts Clinton’s Challenge on Wall Street Speeches
FEBRUARY 19, 2016

ELKO, Nev. – U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign on Friday urged Hillary Clinton to keep her word and release the transcripts of speeches she gave to Wall Street firms “when everybody else does.”

“Sen. Sanders accepts Clinton’s challenge. He will release all of the transcripts of all of his Wall Street speeches. That’s easy. The fact is, there weren’t any. Bernie gave no speeches to Wall Street firms. He wasn’t paid anything while Secretary Clinton made millions, including $675,000 for three paid speeches to Goldman Sachs,” said Sanders’ spokesman Michael Briggs.

“So now we hope Secretary Clinton keeps her word and releases the transcripts of her speeches. We hope she agrees that the American people deserve to know what she told Wall Street behind closed doors,” Briggs added.

Clinton was paid $21.7 million in fees for speeches to groups including Wall Street firms, big corporations and trade associations for 92 talks she delivered from 2013 through last April in the run-up to formally launching her second presidential bid.

On February 20 2016 08:53 GreenHorizons wrote:


Source

I suspect, like with her superPAC, she means the Republicans she might not even get to face (for the 2nd time). It's obvious she's hiding them, and that should concern any voter.

On February 20 2016 08:41 Plansix wrote:

Pretty sure they would regulate the encryption, not the phone. Its not like they can't put new encryption on the next OS.

I am not pro regulation, but that is what is going to happen if there is no other way for law enforcement to gain access to the phone. Right now, every single iphone that has evidence for a criminal investigation is potentially locked away forever. No matter what judicial process or order they obtain, not matter the crime, the phone cannot be opened if its locked. If there is no solution, the government will create one.

On February 20 2016 09:03 Acrofales wrote:

Why?

To clarify: I don't doubt that she praised the bankers and told them they were doing a great job yaddayaddayadda. It'll look terrible when spun through a political machine and ripped out of context. I'm just not sure why I should care that she is keeping that secret.

On February 20 2016 09:06 IgnE wrote:


Look up, for example, the government's attempts decades ago to regulate Pretty Good Privacy, the open source encryption.

On February 20 2016 09:14 Plansix wrote:

There is no way they can control the encryption or prevent key-less encryption from existing. But they can regulate cellphones in the US. And other governments can too. What is going to happen when China wants access a phone and Apple says no and we turn off the auto delete either? Are they going to let Apple sell this encryption to anyone in China?

This is the kind of fire Apple is playing with and why the tech industry isn't super rallying behind them. If no government can open it, why would any government allow it to be sold to their citizens?