4 ms·

The CEO made a public statement. Any number of his employees or security experts could call him out if he were lying. You think all computer security experts

The CEO made a public statement. Any number of his employees or security experts could call him out if he were lying. You think all computer security experts are in cahoots on this? Cook could have lied and said building a special OS was impossible. But he didn't because he knows someone will find out. When you're facing a subpoena, you don't knowingly lie.

XorNot 11y ago
No but you can get away with pretending to be an idiot. Or forgetful.
- studentrob 11y ago
  I think you greatly underestimate what it takes to rise to the top of a tech company. Pretending to be an idiot in tech matters doesn't generally work.
deathanatos 11y ago
> When you're facing a subpoena, you don't knowingly lie. Not that I believe Apple's CEO is lying, however… You don't knowingly lie if you think the risk of getting caught is unacceptably high. That last part is important, I think, and indeed, you state, "because he knows someone will find out", so I know you get it. However, I don't think we should forget that a great deal of the concern we have presently in this thread about the government's capability in introspecting our technology is indirectly the result of the DNI lying under oath¹. ¹I know your post says subpoena, but it seems similar enough that its worth reminding…
vectorjohn 11y ago
No employee at Apple is going to call him out on it, and everyone else can be written off as speculating. Additionally, that letter is written with very carefully fuzzy language so as to remain true-ish. As in, Apple can't make this change and guarantee that nobody else will use it. In the same way that any software change (which they do regularly) could open up a security flaw. That doesn't mean it's likely, or any more likely than any other software update.
- studentrob 11y ago
  > No employee at Apple is going to call him out on it, and everyone else can be written off as speculating. I wouldn't put it past the NSA to have snapped up a former iOS developer for explicitly the purpose of breaking into iPhones. An ex employee could certainly call him out. > Additionally, that letter is written with very carefully fuzzy language so as to remain true-ish. Cook is trying to be as clear as possible to a public who doesn't understand encryption or why Apple is standing up to the FBI. That's a lot to swallow, and yes his letter is carefully worded for good reason. Given that there is a backdoor that Apple could create, it's not unthinkable that with more details, 3rd parties could figure out how to get in too.
  - vectorjohn 11y ago
    > it's not unthinkable that with more details, 3rd parties could figure out how to get in too. This sounds like a misunderstanding. No clever third parties are going to find a way to break code signing. To exploit the security hole Apple already created would require having Apple's signing certificate so that a phone could install the code. If it wasn't for the certificate, it would be quite a bit more trivial to hack a firmware to do a malicious thing and install it on any phone.

XorNot 11y ago

No but you can get away with pretending to be an idiot. Or forgetful.

studentrob 11y ago
I think you greatly underestimate what it takes to rise to the top of a tech company. Pretending to be an idiot in tech matters doesn't generally work.

deathanatos 11y ago

> When you're facing a subpoena, you don't knowingly lie. Not that I believe Apple's CEO is lying, however… You don't knowingly lie if you think the risk of getting caught is unacceptably high. That last part is important, I think, and indeed, you state, "because he knows someone will find out", so I know you get it. However, I don't think we should forget that a great deal of the concern we have presently in this thread about the government's capability in introspecting our technology is indirectly the result of the DNI lying under oath¹. ¹I know your post says subpoena, but it seems similar enough that its worth reminding…

vectorjohn 11y ago

No employee at Apple is going to call him out on it, and everyone else can be written off as speculating. Additionally, that letter is written with very carefully fuzzy language so as to remain true-ish. As in, Apple can't make this change and guarantee that nobody else will use it. In the same way that any software change (which they do regularly) could open up a security flaw. That doesn't mean it's likely, or any more likely than any other software update.

studentrob 11y ago
> No employee at Apple is going to call him out on it, and everyone else can be written off as speculating. I wouldn't put it past the NSA to have snapped up a former iOS developer for explicitly the purpose of breaking into iPhones. An ex employee could certainly call him out. > Additionally, that letter is written with very carefully fuzzy language so as to remain true-ish. Cook is trying to be as clear as possible to a public who doesn't understand encryption or why Apple is standing up to the FBI. That's a lot to swallow, and yes his letter is carefully worded for good reason. Given that there is a backdoor that Apple could create, it's not unthinkable that with more details, 3rd parties could figure out how to get in too.
- vectorjohn 11y ago
  > it's not unthinkable that with more details, 3rd parties could figure out how to get in too. This sounds like a misunderstanding. No clever third parties are going to find a way to break code signing. To exploit the security hole Apple already created would require having Apple's signing certificate so that a phone could install the code. If it wasn't for the certificate, it would be quite a bit more trivial to hack a firmware to do a malicious thing and install it on any phone.