End to end encryption under threat

[Ayahuasca]

So can apple not simply print the transcipts out or do the FBI require accessing the messages on their own behalf to validate them?

If it's the latter it's not hard to see why apple aren't going to allow that.

 

[Bloomfield]

Apple don't have the ability to view the messages.

 

[Rroff]

So can apple not simply print the transcipts out or do the FBI require accessing the messages on their own behalf to validate them?

If it's the latter it's not hard to see why apple aren't going to allow that.

Even Apple don't have access - the FBI wants them to supply (develop) software that would work around safety mechanisms in place that attempt to defeat brute force decryption. (And requesting subsequently that they work in backdoor access in future products).

 

[Broken Hope]

So can apple not simply print the transcipts out or do the FBI require accessing the messages on their own behalf to validate them?

If it's the latter it's not hard to see why apple aren't going to allow that.

Apple don't have the encryption keys so they can't get onto the device themselves.

The FBI want them to write a new version of iOS that will allow them to bruteforce the passcode using a computer to get onto the device.

Apple says no.

 

[scorza]

So can apple not simply print the transcipts out or do the FBI require accessing the messages on their own behalf to validate them?

If it's the latter it's not hard to see why apple aren't going to allow that.

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used. Fraudsters, terrorists and paedophiles using an iPhone? Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future. The court order says that isn't good enough, quite rightly imo.

 

[Sliver]

Apple don't have the encryption keys so they can't get onto the device themselves.

The FBI want them to write a new version of iOS that will allow them to bruteforce the passcode using a computer to get onto the device.

Apple says no.

Sounds like a job for ...

 

[leaskovski]

Can they not create an FBI branch of the IOS code? lol

 

[asim18]

Well, it does if you actually read/understood what people/Apple are saying.

Exactly.

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used. Fraudsters, terrorists and paedophiles using an iPhone? Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future. The court order says that isn't good enough, quite rightly imo.

What a huge deflection haha.

First you were saying those murderers wouldn't have used end to end encryption in a general sense because the idea was banned (which is a ridiculous notion in its own right because murder itself is somewhat banned if you had realised.)

Now you're explicitly saying "Apple", specifically, should be responsible for "Fraudsters, Terrorists, and Peados" specifically

Why are you trying to elicit emotional response using those specifics? Apple isn't responsible for anything lmao.

Most criminals do not believe Apple iMessages are secure - and they're right. Any criminal who really doesn't want their communicae intercepted isn't going to be using Apple iMessages in the first place, and then If Apple stop using end to end encryption in their internet protocol based iMessages it's not going to make any difference whatsoever. There are a whole host of encryption technologies available which cannot physically be banned, they can only be banned notionally.

Finally there are major psyops going on when it comes to crime prevention, you will certainly not understand if I revealed what's actually happening. But all I should say is stop worrying.

 

[Burnsy2023]

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used. Fraudsters, terrorists and paedophiles using an iPhone? Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future. The court order says that isn't good enough, quite rightly imo.

I as a citizen, want the police to prevent crime, especially such as terrorism - but not at any cost. My liberty is also as important as my security. A balance must be struck.

 

[asim18]

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used. Fraudsters, terrorists and paedophiles using an iPhone? Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future. The court order says that isn't good enough, quite rightly imo.

You're still going on trying to elicit emotional response.


"Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future."

What on earth has that got to do with apple? You might as well start blaming evolution for giving people the ability to conspire. Or do you want God to take responsibility for that?

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used.

What about the very mathematicians who created and create encryption? Was their technology written to not absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used?

 

[NickK]

Well this is the issue that they dont realise. Its something that fundamentally cant be enforced, sure they can get the big players who want to trade in uk to subscribe to it like apple and google, but they wont be able to enforce it on foreign companies who publish to the app store, or individuals who just download and compile open source messaging apps. People who dont want to be spied on will simply move to a secure method and those who dont know/care will continue to use apple etc.

Again blocking VPNs wouldnt be something that is possible as an ISP has no knowledge of whether I am VPN'n to my office to work from home or to my azure VM which is running an end point overseas.

I really cant believe it has got this far the only people who will possibly be caught by this will surely be the lowly street dealers and such who we aren't supposed to be targeting with this.

Encryption is at a point now where its not unfeasible for a amateur computer programmer to use widely available tools to create an encrypted messaging app which a) cant be broken without decades of brute forcing b) destroys all evidence after its read and c) is operated and served from somewhere outside of goverments reach.

Given that people probably don't use the iCloud key access chain.. it means that security forces have to make an effort to get to your information stored locally rather than targeting apple's cloud.

All SMS messages in the US are subject to security laws allowing observation, substitution and blocking away.

Government is there to protect the population. However politically it's often been seen that it's actions are governed by control/lobbying by paying rich/organisations. Thus the government is then in a situation it's accessing data but the people doing it are only following "law" but the result of the law is possibly nothing todo with protecting and may even be subversive to the population.

The problem is that normally there is no one employee that has a complete source code set, thus it's impossible for a single person to create a complete installable binary without being noticed.
Now - that binary once made, the sources exists but even with employees not being able to create it, the binary exists. When the binary exists it's effectively bypassing all the corporate security and policies. That means it only takes one employee or one agent or one person in-between to make a it available and the entire Apple ecosystem is no longer secure and results in a stock crash for Apple. Naturally the US agencies will not be subject to the loss of earnings to other such issues.

Question is - is it because they have data or the government don't like Apple? Perhaps Apple can move to the UK instead

 

[Nate--IRL--]

Apple's technology is written in such a way to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the way it's used. Fraudsters, terrorists and paedophiles using an iPhone? Sorry Mr Policeman there's nothing we can do to help you catch these people or stop these sort of crimes from happening in future. The court order says that isn't good enough, quite rightly imo.

Such nonsense. What if the same people used another encryption method that wasn't Apple's? Should all encryption be illegal too?

Nate

 

[scorza]

Family of Fusilier Lee Rigby criticise Apple

Apple's position is completely illogical - they say they're worried by the prospect of a so-called "backdoor" (what the FBI are asking for isn't a backdoor btw) specially created for the authorities to use on Apple's premises getting out and being used by bad actors for nefarious purposes. Surely if that possibility exists then it's also possible, with equal probability for Apple's OS code to be obtained somehow by the same bad actors who could modify it any way want. Starting to wonder if the 'i' in iPhone does stand for ISIS.

 

[Azza]

Family of Fusilier Lee Rigby criticise Apple

Apple's position is completely illogical - they say they're worried by the prospect of a so-called "backdoor" (what the FBI are asking for isn't a backdoor btw) specially created for the authorities to use on Apple's premises getting out and being used by bad actors for nefarious purposes. Surely if that possibility exists then it's also possible, with equal probability for Apple's OS code to be obtained somehow by the same bad actors who could modify it any way want. Starting to wonder if the 'i' in iPhone does stand for ISIS.

 

[leaskovski]

Can they not create an FBI branch of the IOS code? lol

Apparently they can't be bothered to do just that...

The register has a good write up on what is actually being asked of Apple.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/17/apple_iphone_5c/

To me, its not that actual a big deal of what is being asked. I can see why Apple want to protect their product, but it really isn't a backdoor that will be a privacy concern for the world, only that single phone.

 

[Fr0dders]

To me, its not that actual a big deal of what is being asked. I can see why Apple want to protect their product, but it really isn't a backdoor that will be a privacy concern for the world, only that single phone.

For me, it really is.

We've already indicated in this thread that many of us are suspicious about such a solution being handed over to law enforcement. We've said that security services have got form for using these types of techniques to snoop on innocent citizens who may be rightly or wrongly accused but un-convicted of a crime.

If we're saying that we can't trust law enforcement, why all of a sudden do we trust apple ? Lets say they set up a highly specialized conformance team, dedicated to dealing with these types of requests and any time the FBI wants a phone unlocked they send it to that team, how can you guarantee that nobody within that team would be corruptible ? how could you guarantee nobody would try and get into that team purely to obtain the code and release it to the dark net ? What happens if an honest individual gets outed and gets forced to hand over the tech with his family at gunpoint ?

Once its out, its too late. Everybody has the key. The only way to stop the anybody from mis using this method is simply not to create it. The FBI have argued that it could be destroyed. Which is fine, but it sets a precedent. When the US suffers another 9/11 style attack or another major terrorist attack they'll be back asking for it again, and we're right back at square one.

The only way to stop this is not to create it.

 

[Rroff]

^^ Yup once we go down this road there is no turning back and only the bad guys win.

 

[UTmaniac]

How about an unlock code that only lasts for say 24 hours before needing a new one from Apple (in this particular case)?

 

[scorza]

^^ Yup once we go down this road there is no turning back and only the bad guys win.

Actually there is because this so-called backdoor only applies to iPhone 5Cs, which in a few years will be obsolete.

The bad guys win every time they get to carry out their terror attacks, anything that prevents that is a win for the good guys.

How about an unlock code that only lasts for say 24 hours before needing a new one from Apple (in this particular case)?

Doesn't apply in this situation, it seems that the only way in is to "brute force" the screen lock but Apple have put in place measures to prevent brute force attacks. The court order requires Apple to patch the firmware on this phone only, that removes those measures, enabling the FBI to brute force and unlock the phone.

 

[Rroff]

Actually there is because this so-called backdoor only applies to iPhone 5Cs, which in a few years will be obsolete.

The bad guys win every time they get to carry out their terror attacks, anything that prevents that is a win for the good guys.

Once the precedent is set...

A one off win at massive cost isn't necessarily a good thing.