5 ms·

They are coercing companies into using their resources to produce software and introduce backdoors that can hurt honest customers. And this will hurt companies

They are coercing companies into using their resources to produce software and introduce backdoors that can hurt honest customers. And this will hurt companies like Apple, since security is something they sell. In regards to subpoenas, can the government read your mind? Should they be able to? Well, our devices are an extension of our mind and if you make the case that the government should have access, that's a slippery slope imho. Furthermore, this will only work against small time criminals. Crime syndicates on the other hand have the resources to acquire knowledge and protect themselves. There's always the analogue loophole and some would argue that such tactics do nothing but to misuse resources, instead of good old detective work, ultimately hurting the honest taxpayers.

qiqing 11y ago
On that note, if the government has a warrant, should they be allowed to use EEG to get your phone's PIN code regardless of your consent? https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity12/technical-sessions/presentation/martinovic https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity12/technical...
- Crito 11y ago
  If the government has a warrant, should they be allowed to use a stethoscope to get into your safe regardless of your consent? I can't think of any possible reason they shouldn't...
  - khuey 11y ago
    Your analogy doesn't require compelling the participation of the safe manufacturer. The government has the phone, nobody is stopping them from hacking it.
    - Crito 11y ago
      My analogy does not, but neither does the hypothetical scenario it was a response to. > "should they be allowed to use EEG to get your phone's PIN code regardless of your consent?" On the point of compelling labour, I question where Apple's sense of civic responsibility is. They should be eager to help their community and provide any assistance the FBI needs, provided the FBI is acting legally. They should not need to be compelled to help. You can't compel Apple to have a sense of civic duty of course, but it sure is disappointing that they lack one.
txru 11y ago
I know that this particular case makes access to subpoenaed resources a relatively more nuanced and impactful situation. The ideal situation for the government is: 'We need that communication. It is locked to us. We unlock it, given that we have a warrant.' The matter ends. (Ignoring bulk collection, for the moment). The ideal situation for the private consumer is: No one has access to my communications, because I believe in my own privacy strongly. So, in the ideal world, the government requires a method that, if they need to, can decipher communications that occur with a US citizen involved, provided there is a warrant. This is difficult because of the nature of cryptography. What solution shall we find that marries the needs of the government and the private citizen? I don't know. We'll find out. Mind reading is not applicable. That's a problem for a future world. What the government cares about now in terms of subpoenas, and has always cared about, is communication between criminal individuals that they have probable cause and a warrant to search. Again, arguing who it will or will not work for isn't really the concern of the government. They care about the achievability of their enumerated powers, whether they be against terrorists or petty criminals. They are working for a solution, and they will approach some simulacrum of that solution.

qiqing 11y ago

On that note, if the government has a warrant, should they be allowed to use EEG to get your phone's PIN code regardless of your consent? https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity12/technical-sessions/presentation/martinovic https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity12/technical...

Crito 11y ago
If the government has a warrant, should they be allowed to use a stethoscope to get into your safe regardless of your consent? I can't think of any possible reason they shouldn't...
- khuey 11y ago
  Your analogy doesn't require compelling the participation of the safe manufacturer. The government has the phone, nobody is stopping them from hacking it.
  - Crito 11y ago
    My analogy does not, but neither does the hypothetical scenario it was a response to. > "should they be allowed to use EEG to get your phone's PIN code regardless of your consent?" On the point of compelling labour, I question where Apple's sense of civic responsibility is. They should be eager to help their community and provide any assistance the FBI needs, provided the FBI is acting legally. They should not need to be compelled to help. You can't compel Apple to have a sense of civic duty of course, but it sure is disappointing that they lack one.

txru 11y ago

I know that this particular case makes access to subpoenaed resources a relatively more nuanced and impactful situation. The ideal situation for the government is: 'We need that communication. It is locked to us. We unlock it, given that we have a warrant.' The matter ends. (Ignoring bulk collection, for the moment). The ideal situation for the private consumer is: No one has access to my communications, because I believe in my own privacy strongly. So, in the ideal world, the government requires a method that, if they need to, can decipher communications that occur with a US citizen involved, provided there is a warrant. This is difficult because of the nature of cryptography. What solution shall we find that marries the needs of the government and the private citizen? I don't know. We'll find out. Mind reading is not applicable. That's a problem for a future world. What the government cares about now in terms of subpoenas, and has always cared about, is communication between criminal individuals that they have probable cause and a warrant to search. Again, arguing who it will or will not work for isn't really the concern of the government. They care about the achievability of their enumerated powers, whether they be against terrorists or petty criminals. They are working for a solution, and they will approach some simulacrum of that solution.