Apple vs FBI, Encryption Battle Round 2: New York "Drug Dealer" Edition

[TyrianFC]

So we know the story so far: Round 1 saw an Apple vs FBI standoff surrounding access to a gunman-who-killed-14's iphone. Case dropped, FBI is given access via 3rd party instead.

Enter round 2, except replace 'gunman' with 'drug dealer' and 'killed 14 people' with 'has a potential network of drug contacts':

and heres a few articles to start us off:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...dino-hack.html
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/04/...ion-fight.html
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-to-k...ase-1460128066

So this brings up a bunch of very interesting questions and comments:

Remember when the FBI made a big deal proclaiming the proposed access to the terrorists iphone was a one-time event? (/sarcasm) Well here we are just weeks later, except now they want access to a drug dealers phone to get access to 'his contacts'.

Will be interesting to see public sentiment/stance when the words 'gunman/terrorist/murderer' are replaced with 'drug dealer'. Will the greater public be more or less sympathetic to Apples stance in this case under these circumstances?

I have to say, for a country with so many mass shootings - the FBI seemed to have picked a 'pretty boring' case to publicly battle Apple with in round 1 of the encryption saga. Surely of all the shit going on in their country, there are other iphones they need access to, involving more compelling and emotion-invoking cases. Because the reality, for better or for worse, is that most people couldnt give a shit about granting the FBI supreme authority to access some drug dealers phone, and will read the headline then forget it. (What would the public care more about: Granting access to a gunmans phone who killed 14 people, or granting access to a drug dealers phone to 'get access to his network contacts'.).

And what does this mean for the meta-debate about encryption and privacy going forward?

[Deleted]

FBI: Hey Apple, can you crack them phones for us?
Apple: "Sure thang bro, but it might not be good for our public image"
FBI: "Well, we could make it look like you disagree and have some bogus media battle over it"?
Apple: "Aight, I like how you think G"
FBI: "I got you, fam".

[Belize]

0/10 no electric boogaloo.

[Deleted]

FBI: Hey Apple, can you crack them phones for us?
Apple: "Sure thang bro, but it might not be good for our public image"
FBI: "Well, we could make it look like you disagree and have some bogus media battle over it"?
Apple: "Aight, I like how you think G"
FBI: "I got you, fam".

Pretty much this

Also I never realised how gangsta Tim Cook is

word bro

[TyrianFC]

I wonder how likely that scenario really is.

[Deleted]

Pretty much this

Also I never realised how gangsta Tim Cook is

word bro

Damn right he is.

[Independent voter]

Naw, the test case has to be terrorism related, that way the voters will be being the FBI.

Imagine the scenario where Apple refuses to unlock a phone, 20 people die in a terrorist attack and later it was discovered that information on the phone could've prevented it.

Voters will lose their minds, legislators will legislate.

[TyrianFC]

Yeah that would be the fbis dream scenario for sure.

[Kellhound]

Naw, the test case has to be terrorism related, that way the voters will be being the FBI.

Imagine the scenario where Apple refuses to unlock a phone, 20 people die in a terrorist attack and later it was discovered that information on the phone could've prevented it.

Voters will lose their minds, legislators will legislate.

Dont give the FBI any ideas....

[TirielWoW]

They're never going to stop trying as long as they think they can win. Just like the Patriot Act, we're going to be sold the idea that this is for our protection, and give up our liberty in exchange.

[Vizardlorde]

Damn right he is.

Que up white and nerdy.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

They're never going to stop trying as long as they think they can win. Just like the Patriot Act, we're going to be sold the idea that this is for our protection, and give up our liberty in exchange.

At this point they're being dumb at this point. I gave them a chance with that terrorist phone but that's over. This time? Nope, let someone else do it. I can imagine the FBI People are having tantrums at the office >.>

[oxymoronic]

FBI: Hey Apple, can you crack them phones for us?
Apple: "Sure thang bro, but it might not be good for our public image"
FBI: "Well, we could make it look like you disagree and have some bogus media battle over it"?
Apple: "Aight, I like how you think G"
FBI: "I got you, fam".

didnt know apple and the fbi was ran by hood thugs (or wannabees, cause thats how they talk not the real)

- - - Updated - - -

They're never going to stop trying as long as they think they can win. Just like the Patriot Act, we're going to be sold the idea that this is for our protection, and give up our liberty in exchange.

what liberty in particular? you're right to a private phone conversation??? as if your life is interesting, get over yourself.

[Seranthor]

So we know the story so far: Round 1 saw an Apple vs FBI standoff surrounding access to a gunman-who-killed-14's iphone. Case dropped, FBI is given access via 3rd party instead.

Enter round 2, except replace 'gunman' with 'drug dealer' and 'killed 14 people' with 'has a potential network of drug contacts':

FBI said they cracked the first phone on their own... Apple should say 'You cracked the first one on your own, why the hell you bothering us?'

[Utinil]

The issue at hand is that Apple (supposedly) has no way already created to crack the phone. I don't feel the government has the right to force them to create a program, tool, update, etc. If Apple ever does create that software, then the government is perfectly within their rights to demand access to it (with a warrant). The government can not compel you to create something that you don't have.

[Masark]

as if your life is interesting, get over yourself.

Interesting to who? The government or your crazy ex who works for the government?

[Kellhound]

didnt know apple and the fbi was ran by hood thugs (or wannabees, cause thats how they talk not the real)

- - - Updated - - -



what liberty in particular? you're right to a private phone conversation??? as if your life is interesting, get over yourself.

The liberty of privacy. Information is the greatest weapon both the government and criminals (granted those are often one and the same) have against people in general.

[TirielWoW]

what liberty in particular? you're right to a private phone conversation??? as if your life is interesting, get over yourself.

You're missing the point, unsurprisingly, given your name. It doesn't matter if my life is interesting, or if your life isn't interesting. What matters is that US Citizens have a right to privacy. It's in the Constitution.

[PosPosPos]

I mean, the choices are obvious:

A) Choose to have privacy, and very possibly get bombed by a terrorist organization

B) Give it up in some way(oh boo fucking hoo, the government has access to what porn you peruse), and stay much safer.

Some people will choose to die in privacy, but I am pretty sure that most human beings want to simply live, regardless of what lofty ideals they claim to subscribe to.

[Kellhound]

I mean, the choices are obvious:

A) Choose to have privacy, and very possibly get bombed by a terrorist organization

B) Give it up in some way(oh boo fucking hoo, the government has access to what porn you peruse), and stay much safer.

Some people will choose to die in privacy, but I am pretty sure that most human beings want to simply live, regardless of what lofty ideals they claim to subscribe to.

I will take my privacy and the knowledge that it is very very very unlikely I will be killed by a terrorist no matter what the government does or does not do.