Apple Employees, If Ordered To Unlock iPhone, Might Quit (nytimes.com) 417
An anonymous reader quotes an NYTimes article: Apple employees are already discussing what they will do if ordered to help law enforcement authorities. Some say they may balk at the work, while others may even quit their high-paying jobs rather than undermine the security of the software they have already created, according to more than a half-dozen current and former Apple employees. [...] The employees' concerns also provide insight into a company culture that despite the trappings of Silicon Valley wealth still views the world through the decades-old, anti-establishment prism of its co-founders Steven P. Jobs and Steve Wozniak. [...] The fear of losing a paycheck may not have much of an impact on security engineers whose skills are in high demand. Indeed, hiring them could be a badge of honor among other tech companies that share Apple's skepticism of the government's intentions.
They also might quit if.... (Score:5, Funny)
1. Ordered to not bow to the Steve Jobs statue every day.
2. The cafeteria/yoga center runs out of fair-trade artisanal non-GMO lemon grass smoothies.
3. Apple actually starts fixing bugs in OS X instead of focusing on SHINY in iOS.
4. Siri tells them that their auras are not in tune with the universal energy of orange.
Not anti-establishment (Score:5, Insightful)
The entire "anti-establishment" premise of the summary is wrong. It is not anti-establishment for security professionals to refuse to break security.
It is professionally responsible. It's like if a priest is ordered to convert a parishioner to satanism, a doctor is ordered to harm a patient, or a cop is ordered to beat the crap out of an old lady.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Jobs might be dead, but his reality distortion field is alive and well in 2016.
"Reality distortion field," remember? Within it, he is not dead!
Paywalled link, why? (Score:5, Informative)
The link in the summary is to the login of the paywall, which makes no sense. The actual link should be: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/technology/apple-encryption-engineers-if-ordered-to-unlock-iphone-might-resist.html [nytimes.com].
Not that anyone reads TFA...
Might not be smart to quit (Score:5, Insightful)
* = "Hey, remember when Apple said phones couldn't be cracked? Ha, good times, good times. (cries in beer)"
Re: (Score:2)
It might not be smart to quit if, while employed, they are under Apple's umbrella of legal protection. Alone in the wild, could employees with knowledge on how to crack the phone* be pressured to crack the phones? * = "Hey, remember when Apple said phones couldn't be cracked? Ha, good times, good times. (cries in beer)"
The phone can't be cracked. The DOJ wants Apple's signing keys so they can install malware on an iPhone that would disable the data wipe feature. An ex-employee in the wild couldn't do that, unless he stole Apple's keys on his way out.
Re: (Score:3)
Technically it could be cracked using existing techniques that involve depotting and e-beam probing of its chips, but we all know they aren't interested in the data on THIS phone, they want a skeleton key to crack everybody else's phone, ideally one that returns their handy "plug in cable and instantly download everything of interest" tool that so many LEOs are in love with.
Re: (Score:2)
It might not be smart to quit if, while employed, they are under Apple's umbrella of legal protection. Alone in the wild, could employees with knowledge on how to crack the phone* be pressured to crack the phones?
If the design is any good -- and I'm quite sure it is -- then knowledge doesn't matter. What matters is possession of the Apple signing keys, and departing employees wouldn't get to take those with them.
* = "Hey, remember when Apple said phones couldn't be cracked? Ha, good times, good times. (cries in beer)"
All security is relative to a threat model, and when Apple said that they -- quite reasonably -- didn't consider Apple being ordered to sign weakened versions of their security software as part of their threat model.
Now I feel bad. (Score:4, Funny)
I thought affirming that I'd rather quit than attend daily scrum meetings was noble and principled. Damn.
''anti-establishment prism'' ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Has it come to this ? You are anti establishment if you expect the government to play fair, to obey the constitution, to not play games to get powers that it does not really need (for the purposes that it claims that it needs them for anyway) ? What are they putting into your water supply out there ?
Re: (Score:2)
I recommend this instructional video to help you understand the mindset: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
its funny you should mention obeying the constitution, when you advocate willfully disobeying a court order given by the constitution
If the Constitution gave me a court order, I'd likely do it. Then again, I have always feared anthropomorphic imperative documents.
The culture is not anti-establishment (Score:2)
The employees' concerns also provide insight into a company culture that despite the trappings of Silicon Valley wealth still views the world through the decades-old, anti-establishment prism of its co-founders Steven P. Jobs and Steve Wozniak.
The culture is not anti-establishment. Some of the employees might have a general anti-establishment leaning, but Apple is the establishment. Just have a look at their market cap. Also, if the culture of Apple is anti-establishment, then why were they so vigorous
Outsource it to Germany (Score:5, Funny)
Apple can easily solve this problem by forming an independent subsidiary in Germany which will maintain keys and security settings, which is then contracted into the next iOS upgrade. The current keys should be erased at the next upgrade. Then, the German government can approve FBI warrants for the use of the keys.
For real fun, Apple should announce that the iCloud servers for U.S. Government workers are moving to China, starting with all members of congress.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple can easily solve this problem by forming an independent subsidiary in Germany which will maintain keys and security settings, which is then contracted into the next iOS upgrade. The current keys should be erased at the next upgrade. Then, the German government can approve FBI warrants for the use of the keys.
For real fun, Apple should announce that the iCloud servers for U.S. Government workers are moving to China, starting with all members of congress.
That's not a bad idea, except Germany is a bad pick as a soon-to-be Five Eyes country. Perhaps better would be Switzerland, Ireland, Portugal, Poland, etc.
Re:Outsource it to Germany (Score:4, Interesting)
For something like this, they could have a multiple-key system where the updates would have to be signed in, say, any three of Iceland, Sweden, Ireland, and Portugal. Signing the final updates does not have to be instantaneous.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're just at Germany's will anyway - different venue, same problem.
And, it's not the encryption that's the problem. It's the source code. They are being told that they have to modify the device so that the encryption can be bypassed. Physical access to a machine is game over, always remember that. There's little Apple could do to stop that, if it is indeed ordered in court.
If the device was properly encrypted, nothing short of the actual passphrase, or the encryption key itself that's normally pr
This whole thing is STUPID... (Score:5, Insightful)
The FBI already has access to information they need, they are just using this as a strong arm attempt to force a company to bow to their wishes. and sadly they got a corrupt judge to go along with them.
Honestly, if every single american is not up in arms and screaming at their congress critter right now to stop this bullshit, then they need to move to soviet russia where things are more to their liking.
Re: (Score:3)
Eventualities.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The federal government will try to take Apple apart piece by piece: in court, in the press, and perhaps by brain drain from people leaving.
To the government, it's very important to set a precedent where companies have to comply, in all circumstances, with any and all requests for technical assistance- regardless of the true legality. So expect ongoing government behavior to accomplish these goals.
If engineers quit over this, good for them. If Apple makes it out relatively unscathed- I'll be content.
This particular issue- might damage the company and US tech industry in ways we've not even considered yet. Consider the idea that encryption technology moves offshore from the US. Consider the competitive disadvantage if foreign encryption schemes need to be used rather than home grown ones. Would US companies be competitive? Would secure foreign technologies even be available in the US?
This whole thing is dangerous in the long term. Apple better win this or the face of technology changes in the USA.
Simple. (Score:2)
The government can demand you hand things over, but they can't compel you work, unless they conscript you. They can rifle through your stuff, but they can't make you rifle through your neighbors stuff.
So, unless the government is going to "conscript" the entire "person" that is Apple and then order "it" to write the code to defeat their encryption I don't see what the government can do.
For that matter, Apple could simply buy an island in the pacific an
Half a dozen? (Score:3)
For some, perhaps... (Score:2)
"Indeed, hiring them could be a badge of honor...."
Perhaps, but it's not something that I'd count on.
Yes, it would look good on a resume but also signals that the person might quit at perceived notion of something that they didn't agree with, and that could be almost any company policy. But still, it would give the employee some serious street cred and probably make them seen as a solid person.
On the other hand, it could possibly signal a change in the perceived worth of an employee, in that the company nee
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting "leak" from such a secretive company (Score:3)
Better yet, Beastie Boys approach (Score:3)
Sabatage
Agree to help, but at every turn undermine the effort with obscure bugs.
"Oh, you went through every possible combination and it still didn't unlock? Silly me, it was just recycling the first ten attempts the whole time. My bad!".
You could probably string along the FBI indefinitely.
Jackbooted thugs (Score:2)
Relocate the Company. (Score:3)
They should really just relocate their head-office to another country in which they already operate.
And take any developers that want to live overseas someplace.
I say have them set up a development centre in THailand, or the Philippines, and then with the influx of Apple Money, the developers, and their families will be living like wealthy estate owners, complete with house-workers, at a fraction of their current Bay Area living expenses.
They would lose the American Tax loophole, which exists because most countries charge taxes based on where management is located, to avoid what the US does: charges taxes based on region incorporated.
Thus, new tech boom begins in Asia, Massive gentrification, and infrastructure improvements paid for by private companies.
It'd be a Republican's dream.
And as a side-effect, would create a new middle class in the area due to the sudden creation of service economies; and raise wealth due to the influx of US$ (or whatever currency they would use to pay employees)
I would relocate if they gave me the option to (and keep my CA salary)
Re: Is anyone else seeing this as.. (Score:5, Funny)
Can't the FBI use the same encryption breaking schemes they use on SSL to brute force the certificate used to place the original firmware, then hire someone from Algeria for $20/hour to put a new firmware on it? What about that memory heat map hack where they can read software right off the storage, can't they use that to decrypt the current firmware? Are all they advertising is distrust in government? Who is profiting off of the distrust in our own government?
You're really pushing Betteridge's Law this morning.
Re: (Score:2)
That is Godwin's..
Re: (Score:2)
If they use the 'encryption breaking schemes' that they used on lavabit, the court just forces them to hand over the SSL keys.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, it is also true that despite protests to the contrary, acquiescing to the FBI request this time, if it is indeed possible, would both open the way for the FBI and other agencies to request this in the future forever, and force Apple and others to ask this question -
Do I want to sell a product with encryption that cannot be circumvented?
Well, do they? DO we have a right to be secure in our possessions, to not be forced to incriminate ourselves by being forced to provide documents, messages, c
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it certainly seems that way. Unlike in some other cases, this time the government is doing everything "by the book" FBI do have a proper warrant and all of the backing of the Judiciary [npr.org], that the 4th Amendment may require. Apple's continuing resistance can only be explained by either utter legal illiteracy or desire for publicity.
Considering the sheer size of the multi-billion dollar corporation, we can dispense with the former option...
Are you kidding me? You think the DOJ either forcing Apple to write malware to compromise their customers' security, or demanding their security signing keys, is "by the book" and in line with the Constitution?
Re: (Score:3)
You think the DOJ either forcing Apple to write malware to compromise their customers' security, or demanding their security signing keys, is "by the book" and in line with the Constitution?
The second half clearly is allowed, if they pay for it. Problem is, what is the Apple firmware signing key worth? $500 Billion? Something more than DoJ can pay, to be sure. Constitutional problems over takings come down to the requirement to pay for what is taken. Generally, for a company to buy that item they would have to buy the whole company. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that if they want something not for sale, they would have to buy the business to get it. If they government wants to nation
Re:Is anyone else seeing this as.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Constitution [wikipedia.org] does not prevent the Executive from searching citizens. It requires the Executive's cause to be reasonable and approved by the Judiciary's. The requirements the Executive have satisfied in this case.
You are tragically misinformed. Nobody is stopping the DOJ from searching the phone. The problem they are facing is that the data on the phone is encrypted. To circumvent that matter, the DOJ is asking Apple either compromise their own customers' security by making malware, or giving their security keys to the DOJ so they can do the same. That is a violation of Apple's free speech and essentially enslavery.
Both options would've sounded phantastical to the framers of the Constitution, but they are quite analogous to, for example, demanding a landlord's cooperation in opening up a tenant's apartment, or a bank required to open up a customer's safe deposit box.
Those aren't analogous at all, since the landlord and bank have the keys to the doors they are being asked to open. What is more analogous would be if a criminal buried his locked box somewhere, so the U.S. government demanded all shovel owners and shovel manufacturers to start digging for it, or be in contempt of the court.
Re:Is anyone else seeing this as.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, as much as I hate to say this, I think I kind of agree with what is being said. The FBI is merely demanding that someone help them execute a legal warrant, and Apple is refusing to do so. For good reasons, I might add, but I could see how the FBI might have a valid argument there.
However, the real story here is not that Apple could be forced to do this, it is that Apple *can* be forced to do this because they can force a download of an OS to a customer device. In other words, Apple has the master key to the apartment, because they made it that way. The FBI is merely demanding that they use it.
There is no question of *changing* iOS to allow the FBI to do this. iOS already allows this by *design*. It's just a matter of changing the payload.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, as much as I hate to say this, I think I kind of agree with what is being said. The FBI is merely demanding that someone help them execute a legal warrant, and Apple is refusing to do so. For good reasons, I might add, but I could see how the FBI might have a valid argument there.
Previous courts have ruled on what "helping" means especially on 3rd parties. The "undue burden" principle is often cited in that the government can ask for assistance but what is asks is limited in scope. For example if the police think someone else has buried bodies on your property, it can get a warrant to search your property. What it cannot do is force you to do the digging. Also it cannot effectively destroy your house while digging underneath it.
However, the real story here is not that Apple could be forced to do this, it is that Apple *can* be forced to do this because they can force a download of an OS to a customer device. In other words, Apple has the master key to the apartment, because they made it that way. The FBI is merely demanding that they use it.
No, Apple explicitly stated that it does not have the
Re: (Score:2)
"Both options would've sounded phantastical to the framers of the Constitution, but they are quite analogous to, for example, demanding a landlord's cooperation in opening up a tenant's apartment, or a bank required to open up a customer's safe deposit box."
Sure, but not if the box is on Alpha Centaury.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if that key opens up EVERY customer's safe deposit box.
Re: (Score:3)
Not sure about safe-deposit boxes, but many landlords do use master-keys, which can open all apartments in their building. Their cooperation in opening up a particular apartment may still be legally demanded by the police (and backed by a court order) — nothing outrageous here.
That is a false analogy. Apple doesn't have a key to the iPhone.
Re: (Score:3)
The hand-wavy idea that understanding the meaning of what you found in a search is part of the search is rather silly. I don't expect the SCOTUS to be impressed by that, though clearly at least a percentage of Magistrates are.
Nobody doubts that the DoJ has the right to demand that the County Health Department turn over their private encryption keys. The problem is, the owner of the phone (the health department) didn't store the device keys anywhere other than on the device. The only copies of the key are al
4th Amendment not involved (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just because an agency claims it, and a court agrees, and appeals ultimately fail at the highest court, doesn't make it true. It merely makes it legal.
Which is why appointing SCOTUS Justices is more important than and transcends presidential elections. They are above review, short of impeachment, and collectively exert both absolute power and defy review and correction.
Try impeaching one Justice, very difficult. Impeaching two, who could drive the Court in any direction they wish, exceedingly difficult.
Re: (Score:2)
I just need something nobody can break into. This Apple thing makes a good story. If it's true, I don't need your approval at all. Privacy will be mine, and you will just have to live with it.
And that is why the DoJ is fighting so hard against it.
Thank God that Apple has enough money to fight them.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this where I post the XKCD with the guy being interrogated with the $5 pipe wrench for his keys?
Technical solutions are not perfect, if you want something safe, you need to make sure that everyone agrees that they won't touch it. For the FBI or NSA, you want legislation to back up your tech. That way, it's not even legal for them to try to break into it.
Re:Total BS (Score:5, Insightful)
"I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley"
people with the skills, experience, and talent to get another 6-digit salary paying swanky job in an hour with a phone call or two. These arn't people who are going to be out of work for long.
Reality check (Score:2)
Sure, there are plenty of jobs to find out there and the better qualified people never fear losing a job. But.. there is exactly one company called Apple, and people spend years and years trying to get a job at Apple. Just like people do for Google, and Salesforce, and Oracle, and SAP, and to a lesser extent even Microsoft, IBM, and HP.
Established companies with proven longevity and potential for people to move up and around are not that common.
People don't scramble to an Apple interview because of the fr
Re:Reality check (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Salt Mine (Score:3)
We need more skills than working on consumer and fashion devices.
The fact you think that;s all Apple does assures me your company would be terrible to work for.
I don't like Microsoft either but I can still have respect for people that work there and the interesting things they work on. Apple is working on language design, chip design, obviously hardware design, and cutting edge advancements in UI on both desktop and mobile, not to mention possibly cars and VR... if you do't need any of those skills you mus
Re: (Score:2)
Apple developers and engineers do not have the skills to work at my company. We need more skills than working on consumer and fashion devices.
So people who designed Cups, Clang/LLVM, OpenCL and work on a primarily Unix system do not have the skills to work at your company. Yes, big name companies have employees that your company would not hire. But that does not mean every single employee does not have the required skills.
Re:Total BS (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not actually the disagreement that's likely to cause people to quit. Instead, it's the chance of a fuck up.
Suppose you do do this, and you make a mistake. You test your code like crazy, it goes via QA, and gets tested like crazy, you use it on the FBI's phone, and the device gets erased.
There's a reasonable chance that the result of these actions is that you end up in Guantanamo bay.
I'm not gonna take that risk for any salary, even a 6 figure one.
Re: (Score:2)
Eureka! Rock Star Engineer with a conscience accepts the phone unlocking project, code goes through QA cycle but when applied the phone data mysteriously goes, "poof!". Dot Gov can't prove intentional sabotage/obstruction, problem solved.
You don't go to Gitmo for "Oops!"
Re: (Score:2)
Can you be convicted for "Oops"? Probably not. Can the government make your life a living hell as well as telling everyone that you might be secretly working with ISIS and sabotaging the government's investigations followed by a very quiet "looks like we were wrong" 20 months later after the damage has been done and everyone thinks of you as a terrorist? Definitely.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of the Fox people are very much on Apple's side and might actually applaud some engineer who did that. I know, it's odd, isn't it? I've taken to spending a few hours a week listening to Fox New Radio - it's a long story as to why. But, yeah, they came out on Apple's side right at the very start - like on day one. I was kind of surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't go to Gitmo for "Oops!"
Sure you could, all they have to do is frame it the right way.
"Your honor, the defendant claims it was a simple mistake, but the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice all have strong reason to believe it was deliberate. Telling you why would violate National Security, but trust us, we're sure of it."
And off you go....
Re:Total BS (Score:4, Insightful)
Who cares if they can prove it, or have any evidence. Most of the people at Gitmo have been there for more than 13 years without charge or trial, let alone any evidence against them.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, McAfee volunteered to do it. He sounds like the perfect guy for the job ;)
Re:Total BS (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you seriously bashing people who have morals over greed?
My question is similar, but for completely different reasons. IF they quit, they don't (directly) have the support & resources of Apple. Then the gov't can force/threaten them directly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, that's not even close to the worst.
See what the gov't did to Lavabit.
Scroll down a little & read in chronological order the details of what came out this week. 4th amendment denials, among other things. Secret courts are TOTALLY worth it. /s
https://twitter.com/JZdziarski [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Are you seriously bashing people who have morals over greed?
My question is similar, but for completely different reasons. IF they quit, they don't (directly) have the support & resources of Apple. Then the gov't can force/threaten them directly.
Why would the government do that? Unless they made a copy of Apple's source codes and security keys on the way out the door, there's nothing they can give the DOJ but their moral support and technical advice... which Apple has already given them.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they quit because they don't want to work on the GovtOS, then supposedly the Govt already has access to the source code, so they could provide that to the unemployed. With a (literal or figurative) gun to their heads.
Re: (Score:2)
Force them to do what? Without access to the source code, they would be no better than a group of monkeys beating on a keyboard attempting to create a new novel.
Re: (Score:2)
See my response above. Basically, if it got to that point, the govt would already have the source code.
Re:Total BS (Score:5, Interesting)
You are wrong on several levels.
First, I think they are you are assuming they quit a job and become unemployed. The people in question are in HIGH demand. The question is not quit and get unemployment checks, but instead, quit and start your own company as CEO.
Second. It is not about not agreeing with law enforcement, that is your particular fantasy about what is going on. Instead it is quit because they believe that DOJ is violating the Constitution of the United States of America. People that really, truly think the government is about the violate the Constitution really will quit their jobs. This is in direct contradiction to the tin-foil idiots that think the DOJ has already violated the Constitution but have done nothing but post stupid comments.
Your belief that people have no principles reflects your personal mental foibles, not those of the rest of the world. They are not trying to fool anyone, they don't give a crap about what you or the general public cares about.
Also, Demi-gods no longer need money and do it for the principle/love.
Finally, there is nothing magical about Apple. If their best, most devoted, principled employees quit, the next "Jesus-phone" as you put it, will be a piece of crap and fail. Worse, remember who I said they would start their own company? The new Apple failure phone would have to compete with the new products created by the old employees, who quite likely would base their corporation in Vancouver, Canada in order to avoid the FBI issues. Wonderful city, still on the west coast, everyone speaks English.
Re: (Score:2)
And one more thing about the "HIGH demand" part.
If they are looking for a new job BEFORE they're forced to crack their own software then they can say that they were part of the team that built the phone that the government could not break.
Now fast-forward to AFTER they've stayed on and cracked their own software AND the crack has been leaked. Now they're just another team that worked on another BROKEN product.
I'm thinking the job offers for the former will be a lot nicer than for the later.
Re: (Score:2)
For that matter, they could form a new corporation that contracts labor to Apple. Any decision against Apple could not compel the contractor to do a particular thing that is outside of their contract terms (which don't include "hack this dude's phone"), so the FBI's only recourse would be to go after the contractor... which is a company that didn't even exist when all of this went down.
Re:Total BS (Score:5, Insightful)
I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley, just because they do not agree with the law enforcement. Maybe 1 or 2 people with some screws loose upstairs, but no sane person would do such a thing.
The Founding Fathers of our country abandoned their cushy plantations so they could fight for their liberties. Giving up one comfy job out of principle doesn't seem so bad in perspective.
Re: (Score:2)
Answer: Nobody
This is just posturing from people who are paid far too much to do far too little.
Re: (Score:3)
I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley, just because they do not agree with the law enforcement. Maybe 1 or 2 people with some screws loose upstairs, but no sane person would do such a thing.
Considering your integrity to be more important than your job -- even when you can easily get another just as good -- is insane. Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
I am wondering who will quit their 6-digit salary paying swanky job in the Silicon Valley, just because they do not agree with the law enforcement. Maybe 1 or 2 people with some screws loose upstairs, but no sane person would do such a thing.
You make it sound like these people have no choices or options in their employment. Do you know what the value of "Apple Software Engineer" is on a resume, especially "iOS" experience? I can assure you that it means a lot. Plus the fact that while Apple pays well enough, other companies can pay better.
Quite the contrary if they were told they will either help the law enforcement or get fired, I am pretty sure those people would come to the help of FBI in droves.
Given Apple's stance on the matter, I doubt anyone in Apple would spitefully "fire" their employees for not assisting the FBI. They would most likely offer a severance package to "fired" employees or early ret
Re: (Score:2)
there is no law that says the specific employees must rewrite the phone. Only an obligation that the company do so. Employees are free to quit at any time.
Re: (Score:2)
Er yes, thats why I said let them quit. Do try and keep up.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
Another person who doesn't understand civil disobedience shows up in a brown shirt to lick boots.
Re:Let them quit (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's ask snowden about civil disobedience when he gets home. I think he said he might be running a little late.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's ask snowden about civil disobedience when he gets home. I think he said he might be running a little late.
It's a common misconception that civil disobedience requires throwing yourself into the wood chipper that is our "justice" system. It does not.
Re:Let them quit (Score:5, Insightful)
We all have our points of view, but ultimately part of the price you pay for living in a democracy is sometimes having to put up with what you consider dumb decisions made by governments and the courts and other people for voting for idiots. You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
That's why Mohandas Gandhi, Anthony of Padua, Rosa Parks, Edward Snowden, and other civil rights activists are so admired: because they followed every dumb law in existence to the letter.
Re:Let them quit (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'm sure there were people who would have lynched Rosa Parks if given the chance too. Just because you side with the bad guys on bad laws doesn't change the fact that civil disobedience can be a positive trait.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let them quit (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
If only you were around to explain this to Rosa Parks.
Re: (Score:2)
We all have our points of view, but ultimately part of the price you pay for living in a democracy is sometimes having to put up with what you consider dumb decisions made by governments and the courts and other people for voting for idiots. You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
So if they want to chuck their toys out their pram then let them. There are plenty of other people who would like their jobs.
Sorry, I would like to make just one more comment in response to this. The democracy we live in was established by our Founding Fathers, of course. And if they were here now, what would they say in response to "You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey"?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable Rights; that among these, are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these
Re: (Score:2)
" our Founding Fathers,"
Speak for yourself. I'm not a yank.
"that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable Rights"
Unless they were native american or black of course.
"it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it,"
Thats what voting is for. If you change your government by force then you're no better than some banana republic - which , lets be blunt , is all the USA was for a long time after independence.
It's funny how you say "unless they were native american or black" -- those minorities attempted to use civil disobedience to reclaim some of their rights, and only after almost two centuries of doing so were they recompensed for their suffering. Many were killed for this. However, since you believe in "sometimes having to put up with what you consider dumb decisions made by governments and the courts and other people", you must think they got what they deserved for their lawlessness?
Re: (Score:2)
Just pointing out the hypocrisy in your cliched cut and paste quote from your constutition or whatever the hell it is.
Re: (Score:2)
We all have our points of view, but ultimately part of the price you pay for living in a democracy is sometimes having to put up with what you consider dumb decisions made by governments and the courts and other people for voting for idiots. You can't pick and choose which laws or warrants you obey - that way lies anarchy.
Democracy and dumb decisions are one thing, but the current state of affairs has turned into something entirely different. It's clearly no longer "We the People", but "Us and Them", and it's getting worse. Remember, this country was founded by a bunch of people who were fed up with the Us and Them, and rose up violently against the bullshit. We've headed back down that road again, but unfortunately this time, the Them is also the Us. There is no England vs Colonists, or even North vs South. The biggest thre
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
APPLE does not have to comply. Civil Disobedience.
Re:I'd just undermine it (Score:5, Insightful)
This has almost nothing to do with whether or not the FBI can reuse the backdoor. It doesn't even really have much to do with encryption, except as a thin veneer over the real issues.
Rather, this one case will set a precedent for decades to come about whether the government can compel you, Joe Average, into involuntary servitude (aka "slavery") just because the FBI (or any other "legit" law enforcement agency) wants to go on an evidence-fishing trip, against both your own and your customer's interests.
The FBI hasn't asked for a preexisting key, or even just information; they've demanded nothing less than to have Apple spend time and money creating something that doesn't exist because Apple didn't want it to exist. And don't kid yourself about the "offer" to do it themselves if Apple gives them the source code - Have you ever seen the source code to any project bigger than "Hello World"? It would take *more* of Apple's time just helping the FBI set up a viable build environment. The FBI didn't ask for that because that makes it a lot more clear what they've really demanded - Slave labor. "Give us something similar to a key" sounds a lot more palatable than "do our bidding for no pay for a few weeks".
Re:I'd just undermine it (Score:4, Informative)
Oh fuck off, it is not slavery in any fashion
That is correct Comrade. In the People's lands, we use gentle euphemisms like "forced labor."
Re: (Score:3)
Come mow my lawn, for free (because we might find terrorists hiding in the tall grass), or I'll have you kidnapped and locked in a cage until you agree to do so.
How, exactly, does that differ from slavery?
Re: (Score:2)
Put in the backdoor, but make it only work for the next month or so. FBI gets to hack this one phone, but can't do anything with this backdoor in the future.
Except that surrenders the legal precedent whereby law enforcement can demand you write a program to compromise your product's security.
Re:I'd just undermine it (Score:5, Funny)
Except that surrenders the legal precedent whereby law enforcement can demand you write a program to compromise your product's security.
I prefer the current system where computer manufacturers install crapware without being compelled to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
They're compelled. But by money, not the government. It's actually a critically important point.
Re: (Score:2)
Put in the backdoor, but make it only work for the next month or so. FBI gets to hack this one phone, but can't do anything with this backdoor in the future.
The first question is how technically this can be done. Second is Apple has to devise the entire strategy in addition to the new code itself in which the curating and maintenance is vastly more complicated than writing the code. Lastly is even if it was technically possible, legally Apple nor anyone should be force to write code they don't want to write just because the FBI says so.
Re: (Score:2)
"Put in the backdoor, but make it only work for the next month or so. FBI gets to hack this one phone, but can't do anything with this backdoor in the future."
They have already done that and more, no matter how this will end, it will never, ever be possible to happen in the future, you can bet the farm on that.
Re: (Score:3)
Even if the original binaries they hand the FBI are locked to that particular iphone there is no reason to believe the FBI won't eventually reverse engineer that lock so they can use it on all iphones of the same generation.
Re: (Score:3)
People value security and safety over privacy every single time.
This very comment section refutes your claim.