The question Mike asks suggests the answers are mutually exclusive. Which of the two is a lie? But both could be a lie.
1. The FBI did NOT exhaust all possible avenues. FBI might really have tried noting at all. They never really wanted to get into this particular phone. What FBI really wanted was unhindered access to any phone, any time, any where, and unsupervised. It thought if it just asked, it could get what it wanted. Relatively quietly.
2. The FBI does NOT presently have any actual plan for how it might recover secret information from the phone. This lie is merely a ploy to get this case closed and the public relations battle over.
What I would suggest a judge do to verify number 2 is have a court appointed observer witness whatever steps the FBI does. Do they make a genuine attempt? Is the theory of how the attack would work real? This would help prevent the FBI from destroying this phone, which would be another way they could manage to wiggle out of their lies.
1. The FBI breaks into iMessage and declares success. Even though they did NOT actually get control of the entire phone.
2. The FBI is unable to break iMessage but declares that in so attempting they 'accidentally' destroyed the phone.
Either way, this issue is now moot. No more need to order Apple to break into this phone. Thank you for playing.
Now the FBI can regroup and focus on their next attempt to get unlimited access into anyone's phone at any time without supervision. That is what this was about, after all.
I quit watching a few years back when they started whoring Microsoft Surface Tablets and Windows Phones. Trying to make it look like the characters, who are supposedly smart people, would use something that nobody is buying -- at any price. That just completely breaks the suspension of disbelief.
We are going to have to cancel because it has become unwatchable. About 50% of the time when it finishes the commercials during a break it will not return to the video and need restarting which includes all of the commercials again
Sir, what you call 'unwatchable' is what CBS calls 'a business model'.
So you're saying it is SUPPOSED to do the thing it does not do.
And it's not supposed to do the one thing that it is actually used for.
Wow, what a great law. And if it's not supposed to be for censorship, then what would be the objection that Fair Use MUST be considered. Or to a statutory penalty of $150,000 per bogus DMCA takedown where the supposed owner that doesn't actually own a copyright files a DMCA under penalty of perjury.
Piracy is a major concern with this Screening Room
If you get to watch this in your home, you might also have a friend watch with you who did not also pay the incredibly expensive fee.
It seems like the piracy proof set top box better have something like a camera that watches you while you watch the movie. Prevent any unlicensed persons from viewing.
Did Sean consider that the fee paid to watch a first run movie in your home should also have a higher price if your room has more comfortable chairs?
I can see other legitimate concerns the movie industry might have with this. Considering how much you paid, shouldn't you also be subject to random people's cell phones ringing, and cell phone conversations? Babies crying? Small children talking or yelling? If you're going to pay a premium price and get to watch the movie sooner than most people, you should be subject to all of those annoyances, or it would be unfair to the movie industry.
In this case, a software implementation can be patched to make it more secure. Or less secure.
The issue with the FBI is that they want to conscript Apple to build something unprecedented. That can only be done because it is possible to patch the firmware of the component which holds the secret keys.
I'm sure Apple and others are working on ways that the hardware component which keeps the secrets a secret cannot have patches. The simpler this component, the easier to get it right the first time so that patches are never needed. I don't think Apple ever believe it would need to patch this component of the system, yet it was possible.
If the secure component that imposes the time delays and maximum bad password attempts, cannot be patched, then what will the FBI do in the future when there really is no way to fix this with a software update?
Will the world come to an end because a few bad people can use iPhones? Probably not any more likely than if they used other devices to communicate privately.
It is very likely, that there is some mathematically greater than zero probability that the court is having him appear in order to give him everything he asks for without the nuisance of involving the other parties he is suing.
But thanks to the DMCA would-be censors can save the time, cost, and burden of having to make sure they got the fair use question right before causing content to be removed.
But isn't exactly what it is supposed to do?
The text of the DMCA was written by none other than Jack Valenti himself. Then head of the MPAA. You the guy: the VCR is to the movie studios as the Boston Strangler is to the woman alone. That guy. Wrote the DMCA. Congress rubber stamped it. I wonder if they read it?
What makes you think Apple would give the government a warranty disclaimer which is that brief and concise?
When Apple can manage to get an 89 page EULA onto a phone, I think they could do better than that for the government. At least double the number of pages.
For anyone who thinks the jack booted thugs in the middle of the night sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, I would just point out the following.
How many of the following items does America now have: Secret courts. Secret court orders. Secret laws. Secret interpretations of laws. Secret arrests. Secret evidence that can not made available to the defense for national security reasons. Secret convictions. Secret prisons where torture is practiced in secret. (But it's okay because it's not done on American soil.)
Americans should feel safer than ever.
Now does it still seem so far fetched that you could be arrested in the middle of the night by thugs kicking down your door?
And the Going Dark problem MUST be solved. We cannot allow there to be secrets we cannot read.
If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to hide (no secrets).
1. Apple could be forced to write GovtOS. 2. Install it for this one phone. Then another and another... 3. The FBI (at gunpoint) won't leave the building without it. And the private signing keys. (Even if this step does not occur, the rest follow...) 4. Inevitably, it leaks. Or is hacked. 5. Tens of millions of phones are instantly vulnerable. 6. Overnight it is major national news. Apple security compromised. And nothing can be done about it. 7. AND IT IS BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE FBI IS RESPONSIBLE. 8. Suddenly all doubters are convinced. 9. Apple sets about to build new models with security. 10. Everyone wants the new models at a much faster rate than natural upgrade cycles. 11. Profit.
Actually my 'disgust' has changed into 'not surprised anymore'.
Once corruption and being above the law becomes common place, it trickles down into the rest of society. The entire culture then expects the same kind of palm greasing just to do their job, -- or, to not do it in some cases like looking the other way.
The legislators and government officials ARE allowed to pick and choose which laws they want to obey. That permission may not be written down anywhere. But it is common practice. And it will get worse before it gets better. If it gets better.
When I say "allowed", I don't mean morally right or anything like that. I mean they do it, they get away with it, thus they are 'allowed' to do it. Nobody disallows them.
Maybe Microsoft, Apple and Google should give money to the right authorities in Morocco to get the proper licenses. It would probably be cheap. They could easily outspend the entrenched telcos. And most importantly of all . . .
American monopolies need to get a PATENT on American monopolies. And cross license it amongst itself under RAND terms. Non discriminatory. That is, no sufficiently powerful American monopoly is discriminated against in the patent licensing.
Re: Re: Government trying to avoid an open conflict
They also don't reimburse opportunity cost.
That is the loss of money that might have been made by missing a new market opportunity because they are busy writing a new OS for the FBI. That could be a huge cost to the company.
And if not missing a new market, maybe just being a late entrant. Or having a new feature after a competitor rather than before the competitor has it.
On the post: Did The DOJ Lie At The Beginning Of Its iPhone Fight, Or Did It Lie This Week?
Re: When did FBI Lie?
1. The FBI did NOT exhaust all possible avenues. FBI might really have tried noting at all. They never really wanted to get into this particular phone. What FBI really wanted was unhindered access to any phone, any time, any where, and unsupervised. It thought if it just asked, it could get what it wanted. Relatively quietly.
2. The FBI does NOT presently have any actual plan for how it might recover secret information from the phone. This lie is merely a ploy to get this case closed and the public relations battle over.
What I would suggest a judge do to verify number 2 is have a court appointed observer witness whatever steps the FBI does. Do they make a genuine attempt? Is the theory of how the attack would work real? This would help prevent the FBI from destroying this phone, which would be another way they could manage to wiggle out of their lies.
Why do you think they are called the FIB?
On the post: DOJ To Court: Hey, Can We Postpone Tomorrow's Hearing? We Want To See If We Can Use This New Hole To Hack In
I see two possible outcomes
2. The FBI is unable to break iMessage but declares that in so attempting they 'accidentally' destroyed the phone.
Either way, this issue is now moot. No more need to order Apple to break into this phone. Thank you for playing.
Now the FBI can regroup and focus on their next attempt to get unlimited access into anyone's phone at any time without supervision. That is what this was about, after all.
On the post: CBS CEO Forced To Admit Cheaper 'Skinny' TV Bundles 'Inevitable'
CBS threatening to take it's content off the air?
I quit watching a few years back when they started whoring Microsoft Surface Tablets and Windows Phones. Trying to make it look like the characters, who are supposedly smart people, would use something that nobody is buying -- at any price. That just completely breaks the suspension of disbelief.
On the post: CBS CEO Forced To Admit Cheaper 'Skinny' TV Bundles 'Inevitable'
Re: Canceling CBS
On the post: New Decision In Dancing Baby DMCA Takedown Case -- And Everything Is Still A Mess
Re: Re: Digital Millennium Censorship Act
And it's not supposed to do the one thing that it is actually used for.
Wow, what a great law.
And if it's not supposed to be for censorship, then what would be the objection that Fair Use MUST be considered. Or to a statutory penalty of $150,000 per bogus DMCA takedown where the supposed owner that doesn't actually own a copyright files a DMCA under penalty of perjury.
On the post: Sean Parker's New Service Offers Theaters A New Revenue Stream But All They Can See Is Business Model Intereference And Piracy
Piracy is a major concern with this Screening Room
It seems like the piracy proof set top box better have something like a camera that watches you while you watch the movie. Prevent any unlicensed persons from viewing.
Did Sean consider that the fee paid to watch a first run movie in your home should also have a higher price if your room has more comfortable chairs?
I can see other legitimate concerns the movie industry might have with this. Considering how much you paid, shouldn't you also be subject to random people's cell phones ringing, and cell phone conversations? Babies crying? Small children talking or yelling? If you're going to pay a premium price and get to watch the movie sooner than most people, you should be subject to all of those annoyances, or it would be unfair to the movie industry.
On the post: Flaw Discovered In Apple iMessage Encryption, Reminding Us That Compelled Backdoors Are Idiotic
It's still not the same thing
The issue with the FBI is that they want to conscript Apple to build something unprecedented. That can only be done because it is possible to patch the firmware of the component which holds the secret keys.
I'm sure Apple and others are working on ways that the hardware component which keeps the secrets a secret cannot have patches. The simpler this component, the easier to get it right the first time so that patches are never needed. I don't think Apple ever believe it would need to patch this component of the system, yet it was possible.
If the secure component that imposes the time delays and maximum bad password attempts, cannot be patched, then what will the FBI do in the future when there really is no way to fix this with a software update?
Will the world come to an end because a few bad people can use iPhones? Probably not any more likely than if they used other devices to communicate privately.
On the post: Author Sues Half The Internet For Defamation, Copyright Infringement, Cyberbullying, Use Of Section 230
Possible reasons the court ORDERED him to appear?
It is very likely, that there is some mathematically greater than zero probability that the court is having him appear in order to give him everything he asks for without the nuisance of involving the other parties he is suing.
What are the chances?
/s
On the post: New Decision In Dancing Baby DMCA Takedown Case -- And Everything Is Still A Mess
Digital Millennium Censorship Act
The text of the DMCA was written by none other than Jack Valenti himself. Then head of the MPAA. You the guy: the VCR is to the movie studios as the Boston Strangler is to the woman alone. That guy. Wrote the DMCA. Congress rubber stamped it. I wonder if they read it?
On the post: Apple Engineers Contemplate Refusing To Write Code Demanded By Justice Department
Re:
When Apple can manage to get an 89 page EULA onto a phone, I think they could do better than that for the government. At least double the number of pages.
On the post: How Apple Could Lose By Winning: The DOJ's Next Move Could Be Worse
Re: Re: Re:
How many of the following items does America now have:
Secret courts.
Secret court orders.
Secret laws.
Secret interpretations of laws.
Secret arrests.
Secret evidence that can not made available to the defense for national security reasons.
Secret convictions.
Secret prisons where torture is practiced in secret. (But it's okay because it's not done on American soil.)
Americans should feel safer than ever.
Now does it still seem so far fetched that you could be arrested in the middle of the night by thugs kicking down your door?
And the Going Dark problem MUST be solved. We cannot allow there to be secrets we cannot read.
If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to hide (no secrets).
On the post: How Apple Could Lose By Winning: The DOJ's Next Move Could Be Worse
Apple could also Win by Losing
2. Install it for this one phone. Then another and another...
3. The FBI (at gunpoint) won't leave the building without it. And the private signing keys. (Even if this step does not occur, the rest follow...)
4. Inevitably, it leaks. Or is hacked.
5. Tens of millions of phones are instantly vulnerable.
6. Overnight it is major national news. Apple security compromised. And nothing can be done about it.
7. AND IT IS BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE FBI IS RESPONSIBLE.
8. Suddenly all doubters are convinced.
9. Apple sets about to build new models with security.
10. Everyone wants the new models at a much faster rate than natural upgrade cycles.
11. Profit.
On the post: San Francisco Legislators Dodging Public Records Requests With Self-Destructing Text Messages
Re:
0 rows returned.
On the post: San Francisco Legislators Dodging Public Records Requests With Self-Destructing Text Messages
Re: FBI public comment?
Hey, San Francisco, can you please show our tech-clueless agents how to use that app? Right now!
On the post: San Francisco Legislators Dodging Public Records Requests With Self-Destructing Text Messages
Re:
Once corruption and being above the law becomes common place, it trickles down into the rest of society. The entire culture then expects the same kind of palm greasing just to do their job, -- or, to not do it in some cases like looking the other way.
Yes, money does have a trickle down effect.
On the post: San Francisco Legislators Dodging Public Records Requests With Self-Destructing Text Messages
You have it wrong about picking and choosing laws
When I say "allowed", I don't mean morally right or anything like that. I mean they do it, they get away with it, thus they are 'allowed' to do it. Nobody disallows them.
On the post: EU Court Of Justice Advocate General Says Open WiFi Operators Shouldn't Be Liable For Infringement
Only Feelthy Pirates want Open WiFi!
You wouldn't download popcorn would you?
Think of the poor corn farmers!
Oh, wait. Popcorn is also a software title. :-) Nevermind. Poor corn farmers saved.
On the post: Moroccan Telcos Block Free VoIP Calls To Protect Their Bottom Lines
Re: Let's look at the problem from another angle
It's the American Way.
On the post: Moroccan Telcos Block Free VoIP Calls To Protect Their Bottom Lines
American monopolies
Then litigate.
It would be a very winning tragedy.
Er, um. strategy.
On the post: Senator Lindsey Graham Finally Talks To Tech Experts, Switches Side In FBI V. Apple Fight
Re: Re: Government trying to avoid an open conflict
That is the loss of money that might have been made by missing a new market opportunity because they are busy writing a new OS for the FBI. That could be a huge cost to the company.
And if not missing a new market, maybe just being a late entrant. Or having a new feature after a competitor rather than before the competitor has it.
Next >>