# Apple's open letter to the U.S. Gov't refusing to comply: lines drawn **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [February 17, 2016, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327 "2016-02-17T11:40:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2016, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/61 "2016-02-17T22:55:10Z")
_Backdoor Sluts Six_ was by far the best in the series. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/62 "2016-02-18T01:23:48Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > There is no “backdoor”. The word “backdoor” is a red herring. The government’s not demanding a “backdoor”. Apple does not need to create a “backdoor” to fulfill the court order. > > This is an app which can be applied to only one phone in the entire world and that phone only, which would remain solely in Apple’s possession and control, and which would _not_, even if it were somehow to fall into the hands of “hackers”, pose any security risk to anyone anywhere in the world whatsoever. > > Apple is impeding a criminal investigation to appeal to people who don’t understand computer words. There is much bullshit in this post - The FBI wants to circumvent security protocols on a users phone - the only way to do this is thru a ‘backdoor’ of some sort. If you think for one minute that this would be a ‘one time use’ only thing - you’re out of your freaking mind - if for no other reason then it would set a precedent that it CAN be done - which would open the flood gates from other GVT sources - to the point that it would end up being part of the general OS, etc and so on - now - I know thats a worst case slippery slope - but its a believable (and possible) one . You are the one that does not understand computer terms and how this stuff really works - your posts are my cite - every singel one of them belays that you are ignorant of how computer security (and therefore smart phone security) work. Lastly - the idea that it would only apply to a single phone also shows your ignorance of the subject at hand - sure, the scope of the current order may be limited to one phone - but thats not the way software works. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/63 "2016-02-18T01:26:05Z")
> [@treis](#): > > The iPhone is secure against everyone but Apple. Which I think is the reason Apple is fighting this as hard as they are. This case is for a device the FBI has physical access to. But I don’t see any reason Apple couldn’t be forced to comply with a warrant to install surveillance software remotely on a specific device. that software doesn’t exist - and the FBI is not asking to install "surveliance software’ - the FBI is asking for a way to circumvent the security model of the phone. THis is beyond just a piece of spyware. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/64 "2016-02-18T11:29:14Z")
Quotes from an article behind the NYTimes paywall: **Apples’ Stance Highlights a More Confrontational Tech Industry** [QUOTE=NYTimes] Yet underlying all of this is a simple dynamic: Apple, Google, Facebook and other companies hold most of the cards in this confrontation. They have our data, and their businesses depend on the global public’s collective belief that they will do everything they can to protect that data. Any crack in that front could be fatal for tech companies that must operate worldwide. If Apple is forced to open up an iPhone for an American law enforcement investigation, what’s to prevent it from doing so for a request from the Chinese or the Iranians? If Apple is forced to write code that lets the F.B.I. get into the Phone 5c used by Syed Rizwan Farook, the male attacker in the San Bernardino attack, who would be responsible if some hacker got hold of that code and broke into its other devices? [/QUOTE] The conclusion of this article offers this thinking from a tech standpoint, and then ties it to the main point: [QUOTE=NYTimes] One relatively simple fix, Mr. Zdziarski said, would be for Apple to modify future versions of the iPhone to require a user to enter a passcode before the phone will accept the sort of modified operating system that the F.B.I. wants Apple to create. That way, Apple could not unilaterally introduce a code that weakens the iPhone — a user would have to consent to it. “Nothing is 100 percent hacker-proof,” Mr. Zdziarski said, but he pointed out that the judge’s order in this case required Apple to provide “reasonable security assistance” to unlock Mr. Farook’s phone. If Apple alters the security model of future iPhones so that even its own engineers’ “reasonable assistance” will not be able to crack a given device when compelled by the government, a precedent set in this case might lose its lasting force. In other words, even if the F.B.I. wins this case, in the long run, it loses. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/65 "2016-02-18T12:07:38Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > This is an app which can be applied to only one phone in the entire world and that phone only, which would remain solely in Apple’s possession and control, and which would _not_, even if it were somehow to fall into the hands of “hackers”, pose any security risk to anyone anywhere in the world whatsoever. There is more ignorance packed into this sentence than I thought possible. Well done. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/66 "2016-02-18T13:13:14Z")
On NPR, listening to an interview with a fella (Matt something) who was former head of Obama’s counter-terrorism center. The phrase he invoked was “ **Reasonable Insistence** ” - i.e., can this phone’s data be accessed in a specific way, along with the fact the owner of the phone, San Bernadino County, supports access. The ruling on this seems like it would require confronting the universality of the proposed solution. If the universality of the exploit is confirmed, it will greatly strengthen Apple’s case, per the NYTimes article above. Otherwise, if it can be proven to be specific, reasonable insistence would certainly be upheld. ---
**Author:** ![Lucas\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucas_jackson/32/303_2.png) [@Lucas\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucas_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/67 "2016-02-18T14:12:11Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > There is no “backdoor”. The word “backdoor” is a red herring. The government’s not demanding a “backdoor”. Apple does not need to create a “backdoor” to fulfill the court order. > > This is an app which can be applied to only one phone in the entire world and that phone only, which would remain solely in Apple’s possession and control, and which would _not_, even if it were somehow to fall into the hands of “hackers”, pose any security risk to anyone anywhere in the world whatsoever. > > Apple is impeding a criminal investigation to appeal to people who don’t understand computer words. The above post is incorrect. IMO it is you that does not understand. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/68 "2016-02-18T14:22:35Z")
See, in addition to the basic privacy problem, I have another problem with this. The judge’s order is essentially compelling labor without compensation from Apple, and we outlawed slavery a while ago. We’re not talking about the trivial flipping of a switch or allowing a government tech access to something - they’re talking about the development of an alternate version of an entire operating system, which could takes years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Is there any precedent for compelling labor without compensation from someone not convicted of a crime? ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/69 "2016-02-18T14:26:51Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > See, in addition to the basic privacy problem, I have another problem with this. The judge’s order is essentially compelling labor without compensation from Apple, and we outlawed slavery a while ago. We’re not talking about the trivial flipping of a switch or allowing a government tech access to something - they’re talking about the development of an alternate version of an entire operating system, which could takes years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. > > Is there any precedent for compelling labor without compensation from someone not convicted of a crime? The order says “Apple shall advise the government of the reasonable cost of providing this service.” I take that to mean that Apple will be paid for the work. ---
**Author:** ![lieu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c2a13f/32.png) [@lieu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lieu)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/70 "2016-02-18T16:10:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by NYTimes > One relatively simple fix, Mr. Zdziarski said, would be for Apple to modify future versions of the iPhone to require a user to enter a passcode before the phone will accept the sort of modified operating system that the F.B.I. wants Apple to create. That way, Apple could not unilaterally introduce a code that weakens the iPhone - a user would have to consent to it. Admittedly I’m not an IT expert but how does that change things? With Farook (the user) dead aren’t they right back to where they are now? How does that allow them to defeat the existing initial security password requirement? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/71 "2016-02-18T16:10:36Z")
> [@Crotalus](#): > > The order says “Apple shall advise the government of the reasonable cost of providing this service.” I take that to mean that Apple will be paid for the work. Define reasonable - the hit to apple’s stock and reputation should mean something as well - beyond just the technical man-hours. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/72 "2016-02-18T16:12:53Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > We’re not talking about the trivial flipping of a switch or allowing a government tech access to something - they’re talking about the development of an alternate version of an entire operating system, which could takes years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. [Or a few hours tops.](http://www.king5.com/story/tech/news/2016/02/17/apple-could-break-into-its-iphones-easily-and-s-problem/80512730/) > [@](#): > > “This would be within the realm of possibility for Apple to do. It wouldn’t even be especially difficult,” said Zulfikar Ramzan, chief technology officer for RSA, one of the nation’s oldest computer security companies. The company does contract work for the Department of Justice. > > “It’s trivial for them to write this code, it’s an afternoon’s worth of work. It’s just a patch to one phone and then that’s it,” said Philip Lieberman, president and CEO of Lieberman Software, a Los Angeles-based computer security firm. The company does contract work for the Department of Justice. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/73 "2016-02-18T16:15:12Z")
> [@lieu](#): > > Admittedly I’m not an IT expert but how does that change things? With Farook (the user) dead aren’t they right back to where they are now? How does that allow them to defeat the existing initial security password requirement? It’s part of the conundrum – while there are ways to push updates to phones that are ‘locked’ - I think most of them still require user interaction to ‘accept’ them - (depending on user preferences as set by the user). I know last time I had an update to an iPad - I put it off for months before finally accepting it. The FBIs request sounds ‘reasonable’ to lay people - isn’t likely ‘impossible’ from a technical standpoint - but opens a can of worms once done that can’t be undone - not the least of which is a less secure OS in the marketplace. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/74 "2016-02-18T16:18:11Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > [Or a few hours tops.](http://www.king5.com/story/tech/news/2016/02/17/apple-could-break-into-its-iphones-easily-and-s-problem/80512730/) Those are both just opionions of other people - admittedly not lay peopel - but they do not know (or have access to) the iOS innards - so its just one more opinion on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/75 "2016-02-18T16:35:09Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Those are both just opionions of other people - admittedly not lay peopel - but they do not know (or have access to) the iOS innards - so its just one more opinion on the subject. [Dude?](http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/monkeymind/files/2015/08/Thats_just_your_opinion.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/76 "2016-02-18T16:52:28Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > There is no “backdoor”. The word “backdoor” is a red herring. The government’s not demanding a “backdoor”. Apple does not need to create a “backdoor” to fulfill the court order. > > This is an app which can be applied to only one phone in the entire world and that phone only, which would remain solely in Apple’s possession and control, and which would _not_, even if it were somehow to fall into the hands of “hackers”, pose any security risk to anyone anywhere in the world whatsoever. > > Apple is impeding a criminal investigation to appeal to people who don’t understand computer words. This post shows that you really don’t have any idea of what is actually going on. Even if the FBI got this code they can’t guarantee hackers will not get it. Last year over 20 million people got their identities hacked from government computers. Earlier this year the FBI and DHS got hacked and almost 30,000 people got their IDs hacked. > **[Hack Brief: Hacker Leaks the Info of Thousands of FBI and DHS Employees](https://www.wired.com/2016/02/hack-brief-fbi-and-dhs-are-targets-in-employee-info-hack/)** > > The names, titles, and contact information of nearly 30,000 government employees has reportedly been compromised. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/77 "2016-02-18T16:57:27Z")
> [@Drunky\_Smurf](#): > > Even if the FBI got this code they can’t guarantee hackers will not get it. And if hackers got it, _they wouldn’t be able to do anything with it anyway_. They wouldn’t be able to install it on a phone because they don’t have Apple’s authentication key. If they did somehow install it, it wouldn’t work, because that phone wouldn’t be Syed Farook’s phone. They wouldn’t be able to rewrite the app to let it run on other phones, because they don’t have the source code. And if they somehow bypassed all of those obstacles, they’d _still_ have to figure out your password. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/78 "2016-02-18T16:59:17Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > [Dude?](http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/monkeymind/files/2015/08/Thats_just_your_opinion.jpg) yeah - pretty much. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/79 "2016-02-18T17:03:34Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And if hackers got it, _they wouldn’t be able to do anything with it anyway_. They wouldn’t be able to install it on a phone because they don’t have Apple’s authentication key. If they did somehow install it, it wouldn’t work, because that phone wouldn’t be Syed Farook’s phone. They wouldn’t be able to rewrite the app to let it run on other phones, because they don’t have the source code. And if they somehow bypassed all of those obstacles, they’d _still_ have to figure out your password. your ignorance is astounding - you’re assuming the way the court/FBI requested it is how it ‘actually’ works - this isn’t neccisiarliy the case - or the way it would end up being accomplished… Secondly - the whole point of the FBI request is to get past ‘all those obstacles’. Please go post about something you actually understand - somewhere else - because, you simply don’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327/80 "2016-02-18T17:04:46Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > I would assume that if Apple claims that it would be impossible, literally impossible, to comply with the order, then what? If they want a backdoor into all our phones, that is another matter and Apple must refuse. I presume thats the point of this warrant, what the gov’t wants is problematic, as even if Apple submits and creates the desired application, or dusts it off, it still may not be of any use, depending if the guy went with a straight numeric or an alpha numeric or blended password. The overall push on this is to create a condition whereby all device manufacturers have a means by which the govt can access what it wants, when it wants. This is the test case that gives the govt the morale highground. Declan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/apples-open-letter-to-the-u-s-govt-refusing-to-comply-lines-drawn/746327.md?page=5)