NSA works with Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. to collect all your data

[archibaldcrane]

All this over his work-issued phone, when he had a private phone he physically destroyed before the attack.

I wonder which phone he used to contact terrorist buddies?

[Acevalefor]

Source? Because much of that goes against everything else I have read and goes directly against Apple's own statement about what is being asked of them.

It was a radio report from that morning. The point was to say that even the media is spreading misinformation (is that even noteworthy anymore?).The report was, as you said, completely contrary to everything I had heard or read previously and since. It made me think of reading a news article about something which you are familiar with or are involved in and cringing at all the terrible bullshit in the article that is either completely false or very misleading.

[Churchill]

That's how I feel when I read stuff that Snowden says, I feel you bro.

[Meresgi]

The fact that Apple has any control over getting access to encrypted data at all is a red flag that their product isn't as secure as they're claiming it is. If Apple can write a backdoor that compromises already-encrypted data, then anyone already can in theory.

It would require EXTENSIVE knowledge of the underlying code and since Apple doesn't track the UID imprinted on the silicon during the making, it would most likely also require knowing that. The amount of time and money to invest and trying to reverse that AES-256 encryption would be fucking nation state level astronomical.

[Quicklet]

Really disappointing comments on encryption from Obama at SXSW.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...solutist-view/

Obama told the crowd that his dream scenario would involve robust encryption that could be unlocked by a key that was "accessible by the smallest number of people possible for a subset of issues that we agree are important." He next reminded the crowd that, again, "how we design [such a system] is not something I have the expertise to do." That's when the president made it clear that this view was partially fueled by fears of the larger American government machine taking such regulations over, and the tech sector's smartest people should join up now or risk greater digital-privacy consequences.

"We need the tech community to help us solve [this problem]," Obama said. "What will happen is, if everybody goes to their respective corners—if the tech community says, 'either we have strong, perfect encryption, or it's a Big Brother Orwellian world'—what you'll find is, after something really bad happens, the politics will swing. It'll be sloppy, it'll be rushed, and it'll go through congress in ways we haven't thought through. Then we'll have something really dangerous."

The refusal to roll back the march of the security state is one of the great failings of the Obama presidency. It's something that's easy to overlook for many people because the fear of terrorism is so hyped up above all else, but the whole "we need to compromise on this encryption thing" argument does not come across as earnest. There is no "middle ground" when it comes to encryption. If you weaken encryption, you make it easier for the bad guys to exploit those weaknesses as well.

Obama must know this, but my suspicion is he's so scared of the hysteria that would ensue if people felt that encryption somehow "allowed" an attack to happen that he's willing to carry water for the intelligence agencies.

A big concern here is the lack of technological literacy by the general public. When people don't understand why encryption is important and why you can't just selectively choose who gets to bypass it and for what, it's easy to mislead them into handing over more power to the government out of fear.

[Byrthnoth]

His view of it is pretty realistic, though. Currently we have an insecurity state (to the extent that individuals choose to pursue it,) but he's right that it'll only take one encryption-dependent disaster with a republican president/congress before encryption is shortsightedly outlawed at the whim of the grey hairs (to the extent that that is possible.)

[Quicklet]

I think the genie is out of the bottle on encryption, though. Don't you? Any significant weakening of encryption would just hurt US tech companies and shift the problem to international companies / open source. You can't outlaw math, even though I'm sure Republicans would try.

[Byrthnoth]

People that seek out encrypted storage solutions will always be able to do so regardless what legislation passes. It's theoretically possible that encrypted communications could be limited in some dystopian future, but it would be pretty damn hard so I'm going to pretend it's not for the sake of this post. I don't think people who know to seek out these kinds of encryption services are the target of this kind of action, and I'd be shocked to learn that most criminals are hip to the most recent encryption news/options. However, for the sake of argument, lets say that 100% of criminals are using heavy duty encryption.

There are a lot of companies (like Apple) starting to bake more rigorous encryption into their products so now everyone will have encrypted communication / phones the FBI can't access. In a few years, something like 9/11 happens again, with all the terrorists communicating using iChat on their iPhones. The FBI/NSA/CIA all push blame everywhere else and claim they could have stopped it if it wasn't for that darned encryption. Someone puts a bill up to vote that effectively bans encryption for everyone but the government, and it passes. Criminals will still have encryption and encrypted communication (although likely fewer), but now non-criminal citizens will now be breaking the law when they use encrypted communication/storage for the purpose of privacy.

So that future is approximately the same as if the government made Apple/etc. self-break their encryption right now, but it would also be illegal for you to use encryption that is government-proof. I'd rather maintain the current state, which has real encryption options available if you want them but an NSA with terrabytes of dick pics.

[Quicklet]

That's a fair enough concern, but two thoughts here:

(1) I think even in a worst-case scenario, it would be hard to ram through a blanket ban on private encryption because you would still need it for things like banking, password security, etc. Again, I'm also not sure even the worst fearmongering would overcome the very real economic damage it would cause to the tech industry in this country and with international trade. Globalization and the ubiquity of sensitive data make laws like this much harder to enact than they used to be.

(2) Orthogonal to that practicality issue, even if Apple/etc. essentially acquiesced to the government right now, I don't think that would stop the power grab that would happen under your scenario. There's no basis for trusting the government to not abuse this, so you'd be trading very real consequences in the present for the slim hope of avoiding worse in the future.

It's a very real concern, I admit, but I remain unconvinced that it's necessary or proper to weaken encryption given the consequences of doing so.

[dasva]

So seems like a few other companies are stepping up encryption too. Also if you think you only have to worry about republicans trying to crack down on it guess again...

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...tion-fbi-apple

[Niiro]

[Ragnus]

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2016/03...ats-seize-ios/

Look like the DoJ is demanding the iOS source code and probably their company signature also now.

[Krandor]

That would do wonders for Apple's international business, let alone any in the states.

[dasva]

So do what we want or do some other thing we want? Do they really expect a different answer?

[Byrthnoth]

They're arresting some schmo for "The Fappening" today/yesterday/soon.

Turns out at least part of The Fappening was the result of simple phishing. Guy got celeb e-mails somehow and send them messages from not-really-that-official sounding e-mail addresses asking for their login credentials, which they supplied. He did use some Russian tool to rapidly download their iCloud backups, but that was it. I at least expected some kind of technical wizardry when the cape was pulled away from The Fappening. It's kinda disappointing that it was just celebs being dumb.

[Krandor]

Most hacking is just people being stupid, not that surprising.

[Ragnus]

So The Fappening happened because J Law and others were stupid with their apple account info? Or is asking that falling into victim blaming these days?

[BerenTebogo]

[Quicklet]

They're arresting some schmo for "The Fappening" today/yesterday/soon.

Turns out at least part of The Fappening was the result of simple phishing. Guy got celeb e-mails somehow and send them messages from not-really-that-official sounding e-mail addresses asking for their login credentials, which they supplied. He did use some Russian tool to rapidly download their iCloud backups, but that was it. I at least expected some kind of technical wizardry when the cape was pulled away from The Fappening. It's kinda disappointing that it was just celebs being dumb.

I'm pretty sure it was mostly assumed that this was the case way back when people were trying to figure out how they were obtained. Was it the guy from Michigan or wherever in that part of the country?

[Byrthnoth]

Pennsylvania