3 ms·

Backdoor is not what is not mentioned today but it is what will be sought when Apple does make an unbreakable phone. If a loudly media backed ruling to force A

Backdoor is not what is not mentioned today but it is what will be sought when Apple does make an unbreakable phone. If a loudly media backed ruling to force Apple to comply with the FBI is then followed by Apple making a phone which makes it impossible to comply with such requests in the future, it will much easier to get legislation or rulings requiring the all phones have an inbuilt backdoor. This is why the FBI is forcing Apple specifically to do what they or another organization (eg McAfee) might do. Especially since the phone in question, while spectacular from a media perspective, probably has very little interesting on it.

vectorjohn 11y ago
What Apple should have done is quietly comply and NOT set a precedent. Then quietly make it impossible to comply on later phones. Instead they're making a scene about an issue they probably will and should lose.
- aljones 11y ago
  The order came from a public court. According to an article in the nytimes Apple asked the FBI to keep it secret.
exodust 11y ago
I understand your point. But I think too many people have already hosed down the idea of true backdoor features inbuilt for all phones to get around encryption. It was raised previously, and smacked down by the majority, including from many voices within the government. I think honesty is the best option. Apple should say "yes, we can help this time, but we believe in privacy and security, so in future our phones will not be able to be cracked by this or any method". Apple gets to be the good guys for customers, AND help the FBI in this instance. Win win. In future, the FBI couldn't ask Apple anything because we all know their phones are unbreakable. But Apple have dug themselves a hole this time by refusing to go the full distance even though it's technically possible. Probably not the best move IMHO. I'm of course only presuming it's possible to make such an unbreakable phone in future.

vectorjohn 11y ago

What Apple should have done is quietly comply and NOT set a precedent. Then quietly make it impossible to comply on later phones. Instead they're making a scene about an issue they probably will and should lose.

aljones 11y ago
The order came from a public court. According to an article in the nytimes Apple asked the FBI to keep it secret.

exodust 11y ago

I understand your point. But I think too many people have already hosed down the idea of true backdoor features inbuilt for all phones to get around encryption. It was raised previously, and smacked down by the majority, including from many voices within the government. I think honesty is the best option. Apple should say "yes, we can help this time, but we believe in privacy and security, so in future our phones will not be able to be cracked by this or any method". Apple gets to be the good guys for customers, AND help the FBI in this instance. Win win. In future, the FBI couldn't ask Apple anything because we all know their phones are unbreakable. But Apple have dug themselves a hole this time by refusing to go the full distance even though it's technically possible. Probably not the best move IMHO. I'm of course only presuming it's possible to make such an unbreakable phone in future.