I am kind of shocked that the Fbi can't crack an iPhone themselves.
Were all those movies about hacking... wrong?!
Mostly what they're worried about is that too many attempts to brute force it will reset the phone.
The 5C has a hypothetical security vulnerability where it's possible to replace the phone's firmware with another, signed, firmware even though it's locked (not possible on newer models).
The restriction on how many attempts you get to unlock it, and the restriction on how fast you can enter those attempts, are built into the firmware (in newer phones this is built into the hardware and can't be circumvented in this way).
So what the FBI want apple to do is replace the firmware on that phone only with another which, while not unlocking it, makes it practical to brute force it into unlocking without the risk of the phone deleting all its data. It has to be apple that does it because only they can sign the firmware such that there phone will accept it.
right
but i still can't see how they can be compelled to essentially develop firmware through a court order
is well established you can't compel people to work against their will
Sure, I offer no opinion on whether this should have any bearing on whether they should comply or not, I mostly posted it because so many people are getting the detail of what's being ordered so horribly wrong.
I am kind of shocked that the Fbi can't crack an iPhone themselves.
Were all those movies about hacking... wrong?!
Mostly what they're worried about is that too many attempts to brute force it will reset the phone.
The 5C has a hypothetical security vulnerability where it's possible to replace the phone's firmware with another, signed, firmware even though it's locked (not possible on newer models).
The restriction on how many attempts you get to unlock it, and the restriction on how fast you can enter those attempts, are built into the firmware (in newer phones this is built into the hardware and can't be circumvented in this way).
So what the FBI want apple to do is replace the firmware on that phone only with another which, while not unlocking it, makes it practical to brute force it into unlocking without the risk of the phone deleting all its data. It has to be apple that does it because only they can sign the firmware such that there phone will accept it.
right
but i still can't see how they can be compelled to essentially develop firmware through a court order
is well established you can't compel people to work against their will
Sure, I offer no opinion on whether this should have any bearing on whether they should comply or not, I mostly posted it because so many people are getting the detail of what's being ordered so horribly wrong.
oh, i wasn't thinking you were
i just can't see any scenario that doesn't end in apple saying no lol
0
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
They could be hiding anything in there. Even a fursuit
Pulling off a fur fox head to reveal a fur rabbit underneath is the stuff of nightmares.
Seriously though, like I just don't get it. And that's fine, because I'm not lobbying congress to not allow furries healthcare rights or preventing them from getting married. Hell I don't even know a Furry. I'm all for them doing what they do if it makes them happy, but I'll die not understanding it any more than my grandfather never understood Rock and Roll or video games.
"I don't have anything against furries, I just don't want my daughter marrying one."
I didn't say that. My hypothetical kid can do whatever the hell they want (aside from Murder or heavy unstable drug use) and I'd stand behind them.
"I don't have anything against furries and my kids can do anything they want as long as it doesn't carry long-term deleterious consequences to themselves."
0
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I thought police departments had tools to get past lock screens of phones.
Not the new Apple encryption.
Hue hue hue fuck off FBI.
Yeah NPR said this morning that most NYPD offices have an entire cabinet in evidence full of newer iPhones that are just sitting because the cops can't get into them. Some are marked with a number of password attempts remaining so as they get possible ideas as to what the password could be they can test it.
So iphones encrypt all the stuff on your phone by default? I remember in android phones you had to actually enable it in settings and you couldn't use a passcode anymore but a real long password and unlocking your phone might take longer.
0
Options
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
I have a job interview tomorrow for a job here at work. Same job title. It's not really a good thing. Long story short, they were supposed to post a management job that only locals could apply for that would ultimately go to my current boss who is losing his higher paying position.
Only they nixed that and posted a regular i.t. specialist position and didn't tell anyone about the change. So I felt like I had to apply for it to keep a job.
Turns out it was supposed to be my boss's job, only I made the cert list too. Now I have to interview for it because it would be really unprofessional to turn down an interview and I need the practice.
The truth of the matter is my boss will most likely get the job. But if someone decides to fuck him and offer it to me, it's going to make my life very difficult.
If I don't accept, I'm a fool.
If I do, I fuck my boss AND wind up being the only I.T. person left here
anyone see anything concerning about when i go to get insurance quotes it autopopulates possible cars for me
one is my current one
and one is a random ass 2011 nissan sentra
think it is the one other person in the country with my first and last name?
my credit report has no weird accounts or anything sinister
I can't recall if car registrations are public info like home ownership is, but if so it's prob just someone else with your name
500 deductible or $1000, the eternal question
surprisingly geico has the lowest insurance so far. only about $200 more per 6 months (i have basic liability only on my shitbox) if i go with 500 deductible
p much anything requiring insurance is gonna hit both deductibles so it's mostly about how much you wanna have to fork out when an accident happens
if forking over $1000 is something you can handle without any massive distress do that, if that sounds like it's gonna hurt too much do $500
insurance is all about only covering the things you can't really afford to happen, imo. everything else should be handled with budgeting/savings.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
I am kind of shocked that the Fbi can't crack an iPhone themselves.
Were all those movies about hacking... wrong?!
Mostly what they're worried about is that too many attempts to brute force it will reset the phone.
The 5C has a hypothetical security vulnerability where it's possible to replace the phone's firmware with another, signed, firmware even though it's locked (not possible on newer models).
The restriction on how many attempts you get to unlock it, and the restriction on how fast you can enter those attempts, are built into the firmware (in newer phones this is built into the hardware and can't be circumvented in this way).
So what the FBI want apple to do is replace the firmware on that phone only with another which, while not unlocking it, makes it practical to brute force it into unlocking without the risk of the phone deleting all its data. It has to be apple that does it because only they can sign the firmware such that there phone will accept it.
anyone see anything concerning about when i go to get insurance quotes it autopopulates possible cars for me
one is my current one
and one is a random ass 2011 nissan sentra
think it is the one other person in the country with my first and last name?
my credit report has no weird accounts or anything sinister
I can't recall if car registrations are public info like home ownership is, but if so it's prob just someone else with your name
500 deductible or $1000, the eternal question
surprisingly geico has the lowest insurance so far. only about $200 more per 6 months (i have basic liability only on my shitbox) if i go with 500 deductible
We use a $500 deductible and have that safe driver discount. In 8 years my wife and I have only had one issue (cleaning vehicle threw a rock through her windshield and since we'd never been in a wreck since we had insurance through our place our deductible was only $100
are YOU on the beer list?
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
i kinda assumed the gov had all those programs in the works already lol
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
So I guess I need to see a trauma therapist or something. Third time I've had macabre nightmares about what happened and so got no sleep. Working full time and taking two hard courses, I can't manage my life without sleep.
Sucks.
:heartbeat:
+3
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
What's funny is that the CIA could probably (and has probably) busted an iPhone before.
BUT if the CIA got that data and handed it to the FBI, the FBI would have to show in court how they got said data.
Which in the end wouldn't matter because for all of snowden's leaked documents nothing will ever be done to change the CIA.
So yeah, the Feds should just get the CIA to crack it. They probably already have.
Not really - parallel construction is a thing.
They would doubtless love to have the capability for themselves and for lower-tier LEO as well, because the natural progression of this kind of thing is going from a one-of or limited use case in the light of legitimate terrorism to applying it broadly and without oversight to drug cases and political dissidence :rotate:
On that note, I'm watching The Wire again (Girlfriend has never seen it) and watching all the hoops the detectives have to jump through to clone pagers and tap Verizon payphones is hilarious, knowing that today they'd just say "Hey boss, can I borrow the Stingray for the weekend?" and a judge would never hear about it.
In my last job, my team of two was supposed to crack an iPhone for a client, and it didn't really go anywhere. Our supervisor knew that it was process prone to failure and dead ends, but at some point executives from both companies got involved for some reason. We had to endure endless "just do it!" shit from this guy who kept demanding definitive answers and timelines, and just wouldn't accept that it was an incredibly difficult thing that could end up with no results and impossible to give a timeline for. The timeline is "how much do you have to left to spend on this?"
0
Options
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
It's really cold in this basement today. Maybe I'll put on a coat.
Their other main target is weirdly enough: police stations! It has happened to a lot of police centers and they also tend to pay the ransoms.
Makes sense if you are sitting Ukraine.
Although I tend to victim blame the shit out of organizations for this easily and relatively inexpensively avoidable event.
I bet 20 bucks that bowen never had to deal with this shit.
Is this really victim blaming?
I dunno at what point do you say the hospital cheaped out on their IT infrastructure and employees, and didn't enforce their own technology agreements, and they had it coming?
We'd have a rough few days if it happened, but we're ultimately safe.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I'm against them making Apple do whatever Apple doesn't want to do or whatever
but that tweet... that's not the same thing? is it? this isn't about companies selling out could-be terrorists, it's about getting into phones
not taking a stand either way, I don't see how the three hypotheticals listed are the same
They could be hiding anything in there. Even a fursuit
Pulling off a fur fox head to reveal a fur rabbit underneath is the stuff of nightmares.
Seriously though, like I just don't get it. And that's fine, because I'm not lobbying congress to not allow furries healthcare rights or preventing them from getting married. Hell I don't even know a Furry. I'm all for them doing what they do if it makes them happy, but I'll die not understanding it any more than my grandfather never understood Rock and Roll or video games.
"I don't have anything against furries, I just don't want my daughter marrying one."
I didn't say that. My hypothetical kid can do whatever the hell they want (aside from Murder or heavy unstable drug use) and I'd stand behind them.
"I don't have anything against furries and my kids can do anything they want as long as it doesn't carry long-term deleterious consequences to themselves."
I think it's perfectly fair to say that my hypothetical kids, if living under my roof, aren't allowed to commit murder or recklessly use heavy drugs. I'm not going to defend that one.
....meh.
are YOU on the beer list?
0
Options
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
I have a job interview tomorrow for a job here at work. Same job title. It's not really a good thing. Long story short, they were supposed to post a management job that only locals could apply for that would ultimately go to my current boss who is losing his higher paying position.
Only they nixed that and posted a regular i.t. specialist position and didn't tell anyone about the change. So I felt like I had to apply for it to keep a job.
Turns out it was supposed to be my boss's job, only I made the cert list too. Now I have to interview for it because it would be really unprofessional to turn down an interview and I need the practice.
The truth of the matter is my boss will most likely get the job. But if someone decides to fuck him and offer it to me, it's going to make my life very difficult.
If I don't accept, I'm a fool.
If I do, I fuck my boss AND wind up being the only I.T. person left here
God damn it.
this made me laugh out loud
i want you to know that your bizarre misfortune is, at least, entertaining to others
+2
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I have a job interview tomorrow for a job here at work. Same job title. It's not really a good thing. Long story short, they were supposed to post a management job that only locals could apply for that would ultimately go to my current boss who is losing his higher paying position.
Only they nixed that and posted a regular i.t. specialist position and didn't tell anyone about the change. So I felt like I had to apply for it to keep a job.
Turns out it was supposed to be my boss's job, only I made the cert list too. Now I have to interview for it because it would be really unprofessional to turn down an interview and I need the practice.
The truth of the matter is my boss will most likely get the job. But if someone decides to fuck him and offer it to me, it's going to make my life very difficult.
If I don't accept, I'm a fool.
If I do, I fuck my boss AND wind up being the only I.T. person left here
God damn it.
this made me laugh out loud
i want you to know that your bizarre misfortune is, at least, entertaining to others
+4
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
anyone see anything concerning about when i go to get insurance quotes it autopopulates possible cars for me
one is my current one
and one is a random ass 2011 nissan sentra
think it is the one other person in the country with my first and last name?
my credit report has no weird accounts or anything sinister
I can't recall if car registrations are public info like home ownership is, but if so it's prob just someone else with your name
500 deductible or $1000, the eternal question
surprisingly geico has the lowest insurance so far. only about $200 more per 6 months (i have basic liability only on my shitbox) if i go with 500 deductible
p much anything requiring insurance is gonna hit both deductibles so it's mostly about how much you wanna have to fork out when an accident happens
if forking over $1000 is something you can handle without any massive distress do that, if that sounds like it's gonna hurt too much do $500
insurance is all about only covering the things you can't really afford to happen, imo. everything else should be handled with budgeting/savings.
i could live with a random thousand dollar expense i could put on a credit card for a bit so yeah
saves $100+ a year. i'm a pretty careful driver.
comprehensive is cheaper so a 500 deductible is only $12 more per year. and that can be like animals or someone breaking your window. i think i'll go with 500 comp, 1000 collision
I am kind of shocked that the Fbi can't crack an iPhone themselves.
Were all those movies about hacking... wrong?!
Mostly what they're worried about is that too many attempts to brute force it will reset the phone.
The 5C has a hypothetical security vulnerability where it's possible to replace the phone's firmware with another, signed, firmware even though it's locked (not possible on newer models).
The restriction on how many attempts you get to unlock it, and the restriction on how fast you can enter those attempts, are built into the firmware (in newer phones this is built into the hardware and can't be circumvented in this way).
So what the FBI want apple to do is replace the firmware on that phone only with another which, while not unlocking it, makes it practical to brute force it into unlocking without the risk of the phone deleting all its data. It has to be apple that does it because only they can sign the firmware such that there phone will accept it.
right
but i still can't see how they can be compelled to essentially develop firmware through a court order
is well established you can't compel people to work against their will
It's a really odd situation though.
If the phone were a person, and they had information and refused to disclose it despite being granted full immunity, they could feasibly be held on a material witness warrant, and if they still refused they could be held in contempt and jailed indefinitely.
If the phone were some crazy high-tech safe, where doing anything to it would cause its contents to be destroyed, and even the safe company couldn't open it, the FBI could get the design drawings and schematics of the safe to figure out a way into it.
But a phone has become some nebulous extension of a person now, and the data in it held to a higher standard because of the ability of others to access it in day to day life in ways a safe full of information in your house couldn't be accessed, and coupled with the previous violation of that, rightfully or not, expected privacy by the government accessing someone's encrypted device surreptitiously it's held to this higher standard.
0
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
What's funny is that the CIA could probably (and has probably) busted an iPhone before.
BUT if the CIA got that data and handed it to the FBI, the FBI would have to show in court how they got said data.
Which in the end wouldn't matter because for all of snowden's leaked documents nothing will ever be done to change the CIA.
So yeah, the Feds should just get the CIA to crack it. They probably already have.
Not really - parallel construction is a thing.
They would doubtless love to have the capability for themselves and for lower-tier LEO as well, because the natural progression of this kind of thing is going from a one-of or limited use case in the light of legitimate terrorism to applying it broadly and without oversight to drug cases and political dissidence :rotate:
On that note, I'm watching The Wire again (Girlfriend has never seen it) and watching all the hoops the detectives have to jump through to clone pagers and tap Verizon payphones is hilarious, knowing that today they'd just say "Hey boss, can I borrow the Stingray for the weekend?" and a judge would never hear about it.
You're saying if the Feds, after being told no by apple, magically had the data they needed, Apple wouldn't sue (and likely win) to see how that data was obtained, which could affect how the data was used in the first place?
That makes no sense to me, but if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
A bunch of beachgoers in Argentina last week inadvertently killed an endangered baby dolphin when they scooped it out of the ocean and started taking pictures of it.
my cousin just posted a link to an article about how a bunch of idiot beachgoers killed a tiny Franciscana dolphin that had beached, because they kept passing it around in a giant crowd for selfies
and dolphins, shockingly, need to be in the water to survive
this makes me really angry
fkn traumatic death too
that's like
if you were a mer person and brought a puppy underwater to show everyone
poo
+7
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
In my last job, my team of two was supposed to crack an iPhone for a client, and it didn't really go anywhere. Our supervisor knew that it was process prone to failure and dead ends, but at some point executives from both companies got involved for some reason. We had to endure endless "just do it!" shit from this guy who kept demanding definitive answers and timelines, and just wouldn't accept that it was an incredibly difficult thing that could end up with no results and impossible to give a timeline for. The timeline is "how much do you have to left to spend on this?"
I once had my bosses bosses boss (a regional manager three steps down from a CEO) come to me (and at the time I was desktop fucking support, not a server admin) because a disgruntled employee had started an internet forum badmouthing our company and he wanted me to a) find it, b) find out who created it, and c) shut it down, from the internet, and remove it.
This was an actual request I was given, right after being asked to replace the toner in the copier.
i think Ex Machina was my favorite movie this year
the ending was perfect and it really cemented the rise of both Oscar Issac and Bill Weasley.
Yeah that movie is freaking awesome. The themes in it are pretty complex and the overall feeling it evokes is just creepy. Also uncanny valley like woah.
I'm against them making Apple do whatever Apple doesn't want to do or whatever
but that tweet... that's not the same thing? is it? this isn't about companies selling out could-be terrorists, it's about getting into phones
not taking a stand either way, I don't see how the three hypotheticals listed are the same
The hypotheticals are all variations on the theme of "can the government arbitrarily force a company to make changes to their products for the benefit of law enforcement".
As an aside the anti-gun lobby will have a field day with that power, if so.
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
A bunch of beachgoers in Argentina last week inadvertently killed an endangered baby dolphin when they scooped it out of the ocean and started taking pictures of it.
selfie culture is killing this world
tbf dolphins are assholes
just like people
though i guess i would feel bad if that were a human baby and not a dolphin one
so conflicted
nature is cruel
Chanus on
Allegedly a voice of reason.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I am kind of shocked that the Fbi can't crack an iPhone themselves.
Were all those movies about hacking... wrong?!
Mostly what they're worried about is that too many attempts to brute force it will reset the phone.
The 5C has a hypothetical security vulnerability where it's possible to replace the phone's firmware with another, signed, firmware even though it's locked (not possible on newer models).
The restriction on how many attempts you get to unlock it, and the restriction on how fast you can enter those attempts, are built into the firmware (in newer phones this is built into the hardware and can't be circumvented in this way).
So what the FBI want apple to do is replace the firmware on that phone only with another which, while not unlocking it, makes it practical to brute force it into unlocking without the risk of the phone deleting all its data. It has to be apple that does it because only they can sign the firmware such that there phone will accept it.
right
but i still can't see how they can be compelled to essentially develop firmware through a court order
is well established you can't compel people to work against their will
It's a really odd situation though.
If the phone were a person, and they had information and refused to disclose it despite being granted full immunity, they could feasibly be held on a material witness warrant, and if they still refused they could be held in contempt and jailed indefinitely.
If the phone were some crazy high-tech safe, where doing anything to it would cause its contents to be destroyed, and even the safe company couldn't open it, the FBI could get the design drawings and schematics of the safe to figure out a way into it.
But a phone has become some nebulous extension of a person now, and the data in it held to a higher standard because of the ability of others to access it in day to day life in ways a safe full of information in your house couldn't be accessed, and coupled with the previous violation of that, rightfully or not, expected privacy by the government accessing someone's encrypted device surreptitiously it's held to this higher standard.
It's not even a higher standard thing (though I don't disagree). The hypotheticals you provided don't really apply because there is literally nothing they can do short of allocating development resources to create firmware to unlock it. Essentially, they are asking to make one of their devices insecure for free.
There is literally nothing they can do to compel them to do something like that.
In my last job, my team of two was supposed to crack an iPhone for a client, and it didn't really go anywhere. Our supervisor knew that it was process prone to failure and dead ends, but at some point executives from both companies got involved for some reason. We had to endure endless "just do it!" shit from this guy who kept demanding definitive answers and timelines, and just wouldn't accept that it was an incredibly difficult thing that could end up with no results and impossible to give a timeline for. The timeline is "how much do you have to left to spend on this?"
I once had my bosses bosses boss (a regional manager three steps down from a CEO) come to me (and at the time I was desktop fucking support, not a server admin) because a disgruntled employee had started an internet forum badmouthing our company and he wanted me to a) find it, b) find out who created it, and c) shut it down, from the internet, and remove it.
This was an actual request I was given, right after being asked to replace the toner in the copier.
Posts
It's encrypted tho
Sure, I offer no opinion on whether this should have any bearing on whether they should comply or not, I mostly posted it because so many people are getting the detail of what's being ordered so horribly wrong.
surely this just means they need a spunky young techie and a brief time skip before moving on with the plot
Those Dark Elves are doing a shitty job of hiding. Look at all them guards!
oh, i wasn't thinking you were
i just can't see any scenario that doesn't end in apple saying no lol
i love and hate ludious
"I don't have anything against furries and my kids can do anything they want as long as it doesn't carry long-term deleterious consequences to themselves."
Yeah NPR said this morning that most NYPD offices have an entire cabinet in evidence full of newer iPhones that are just sitting because the cops can't get into them. Some are marked with a number of password attempts remaining so as they get possible ideas as to what the password could be they can test it.
problem solved!
Only they nixed that and posted a regular i.t. specialist position and didn't tell anyone about the change. So I felt like I had to apply for it to keep a job.
Turns out it was supposed to be my boss's job, only I made the cert list too. Now I have to interview for it because it would be really unprofessional to turn down an interview and I need the practice.
The truth of the matter is my boss will most likely get the job. But if someone decides to fuck him and offer it to me, it's going to make my life very difficult.
If I don't accept, I'm a fool.
If I do, I fuck my boss AND wind up being the only I.T. person left here
God damn it.
p much anything requiring insurance is gonna hit both deductibles so it's mostly about how much you wanna have to fork out when an accident happens
if forking over $1000 is something you can handle without any massive distress do that, if that sounds like it's gonna hurt too much do $500
insurance is all about only covering the things you can't really afford to happen, imo. everything else should be handled with budgeting/savings.
Oscar Issac was amazing
as for the ending...
We use a $500 deductible and have that safe driver discount. In 8 years my wife and I have only had one issue (cleaning vehicle threw a rock through her windshield and since we'd never been in a wreck since we had insurance through our place our deductible was only $100
:heartbeat:
Not really - parallel construction is a thing.
They would doubtless love to have the capability for themselves and for lower-tier LEO as well, because the natural progression of this kind of thing is going from a one-of or limited use case in the light of legitimate terrorism to applying it broadly and without oversight to drug cases and political dissidence :rotate:
On that note, I'm watching The Wire again (Girlfriend has never seen it) and watching all the hoops the detectives have to jump through to clone pagers and tap Verizon payphones is hilarious, knowing that today they'd just say "Hey boss, can I borrow the Stingray for the weekend?" and a judge would never hear about it.
We'd have a rough few days if it happened, but we're ultimately safe.
but that tweet... that's not the same thing? is it? this isn't about companies selling out could-be terrorists, it's about getting into phones
not taking a stand either way, I don't see how the three hypotheticals listed are the same
I think it's perfectly fair to say that my hypothetical kids, if living under my roof, aren't allowed to commit murder or recklessly use heavy drugs. I'm not going to defend that one.
....meh.
there is nothing awesome about this situation.
this made me laugh out loud
i want you to know that your bizarre misfortune is, at least, entertaining to others
EAT OR BE EATEN
i could live with a random thousand dollar expense i could put on a credit card for a bit so yeah
saves $100+ a year. i'm a pretty careful driver.
comprehensive is cheaper so a 500 deductible is only $12 more per year. and that can be like animals or someone breaking your window. i think i'll go with 500 comp, 1000 collision
It's a really odd situation though.
If the phone were a person, and they had information and refused to disclose it despite being granted full immunity, they could feasibly be held on a material witness warrant, and if they still refused they could be held in contempt and jailed indefinitely.
If the phone were some crazy high-tech safe, where doing anything to it would cause its contents to be destroyed, and even the safe company couldn't open it, the FBI could get the design drawings and schematics of the safe to figure out a way into it.
But a phone has become some nebulous extension of a person now, and the data in it held to a higher standard because of the ability of others to access it in day to day life in ways a safe full of information in your house couldn't be accessed, and coupled with the previous violation of that, rightfully or not, expected privacy by the government accessing someone's encrypted device surreptitiously it's held to this higher standard.
You're saying if the Feds, after being told no by apple, magically had the data they needed, Apple wouldn't sue (and likely win) to see how that data was obtained, which could affect how the data was used in the first place?
That makes no sense to me, but if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
You've found yourself in a Coen Brothers-esque quagmire.
yeah only my boss is a gun nut and slightly unhinged so is it gonna be that scene with brad pitt in the closet?
selfie culture is killing this world
fkn traumatic death too
that's like
if you were a mer person and brought a puppy underwater to show everyone
I once had my bosses bosses boss (a regional manager three steps down from a CEO) come to me (and at the time I was desktop fucking support, not a server admin) because a disgruntled employee had started an internet forum badmouthing our company and he wanted me to a) find it, b) find out who created it, and c) shut it down, from the internet, and remove it.
This was an actual request I was given, right after being asked to replace the toner in the copier.
I worked there about another two months.
Yeah that movie is freaking awesome. The themes in it are pretty complex and the overall feeling it evokes is just creepy. Also uncanny valley like woah.
The hypotheticals are all variations on the theme of "can the government arbitrarily force a company to make changes to their products for the benefit of law enforcement".
As an aside the anti-gun lobby will have a field day with that power, if so.
tbf dolphins are assholes
just like people
though i guess i would feel bad if that were a human baby and not a dolphin one
so conflicted
nature is cruel
It's not even a higher standard thing (though I don't disagree). The hypotheticals you provided don't really apply because there is literally nothing they can do short of allocating development resources to create firmware to unlock it. Essentially, they are asking to make one of their devices insecure for free.
There is literally nothing they can do to compel them to do something like that.
Did you replace the toner?