Apple and CopyLeft?

[killivolt]

I was watching a Cable Channel called "Squawk Alley" on Tech this morning and came up with a question?

Will this really end up an Attack on CopyLeft protection? If the Gov wins and forces Apple to comply to open up a "Back Door" to the OS, then what? will this risk Engineers and Companies who enjoy their private software development now open for those like NSA? or others who are a part of "Big Data"

How tempting would it be for someone at those agencies to sell off what you have created? We know how greedy people are these days, some are willing to do steal it and sell it in-spite of the risk's.

Do you really think the Gov and Law Enforcement can be trusted with such "Back Doors" would it open a pandora's Box for those trying to protect their intellectual property rights?

Since so many Engineers as well as people who have been in the Military on the Forum and it involves homeland security. I thought I would try and get some input.

My problem is learning a little about the CopyLeft protection Law while taking a Intro Class on Networking Linux and Unix Administration this Semester.

I still don't fully understand how this might impact on Open Source and Closed Source Code. Any potential risk's?


kv

 

[jpanhalt]

As Judge Bork said during his confirmation hearings for the SCOTUS, there is no right to privacy in the Constitution. Of course, we all know that in practice, a certain amount of privacy is protected. The one over-reaching element, however, is a court order. I have yet to see a statement regarding privacy policies in which the condition, "or as required by law," is not included.

It is well established law that with a proper court order, the government can probe and examine your own body for evidence, including using invasive procedures. Why should it not be able to examine an electronic device carried in your hand? The present case will be a long battle, but destruction of evidence, even if that evidence cannot be shown to have putative value is still against the law. If it goes to the Supreme Court, the arguments will be quite interesting.

John

 

[ronsimpson]

The Apple problem:
The government has the right to brake down your front door and come in.
>The bigger lock you put on the door the more damage they will do while coming in.
For Apple, they made a lock and you make the key. Apple does not have a master key. (any key)
>The government wants Apple to not make locks with out a master key.
This is like making a "safe room" that is not save. It kills the whole idea of safe.
>This is like outlawing a safe room that locks from the inside.
This is like outlawing encrypted files.
>(you can encrypt only if you send a copy of the key to the FBI)

I don't know what is right/wrong.

 

[jpanhalt]

My guess is that some $1000/h attorneys discussed the options at length and came up with the present position of, "We are not sure we can do it (lawyer back door), but if we could it would be too dangerous."
There are only two variables: 1) Can it be done; and 2) Will Apple do it?

Options:
1) Can't be done: There would be quick legislative resolution of that position. There would also be a pretty invasive investigation to make Apple show it answered in good faith.
2) Can be done, but we won't do it: Worse outcome for Apple and its executives than option #1.
3) Aren't sure it can be done, but even it it could be done, it would be too dangerous to do. Lawyer speak: a defensible position. What is the lesser evil is a judgment call. The Apple executives are just using their best judgment and will avoid jail in all likelihood when forced by a court to do it. Lay translation: go pound sand.

John

 

[ronsimpson]

Apples position is that they don't have a key or any way in. That is in the hands of the owner of the device. So we can't as things are now. Apples defense has, from the beginning, is that they don't have a key so they are not responsible for opening it up.

The Government thinks they can force Apple to make back doors in, from now on. Would you use a safe place to put things knowing that there is a back door in?

 

[jpanhalt]

Apples position is that they don't have a key or any way in.

I beg to differ with you. Tim Cook has never said it can't be done. He has said that to do it would be dangerous to the perception that the iPhone is secure. In other words, Apple has made a management decision that the cost of defending this impending lawsuit is worth the marketing advantage.

This is from the NY Times:

If we ever have an effective legislature, it will simply make a law under the Commerce Clause that will require any device sold in the USA to have a backdoor to the government. Whether that can be extended to the "use or possession" of devices tha do not comply may be up to question.

If Mr. Cook has said it cannot be done, I would love to see him interrogated by Trey Gowdy, and we may see that. In the meantime, the trail to the accomplices gets cold and some Americans think that is good.

John

 

[Mickster]

Maybe the position of Apple is in the wording...
"Apples position is that they don't have a key or any way in."
Perhaps they currently do not have any of the options, because they have not had the need to create them thus far?

 

[ronsimpson]

The interview I saw; as things are now there is no way. Apple made it that way.
There are two items:
1) What they make now can not be opened, except by the person with the key.
2) The government wants apple to make a back door for all products. New software! All old products to have the software updated. (down-dated??)

Tim Cook has never said it can't be done.

What can't be done?
Back doors can be added, that is clear.
Using today's software, Apple can not retrieve information. That is what can not be done.
Using next year's software (assuming a back door) Apple, Government, and hackers can get in.

Perhaps they currently do not have any of the options, because they have not had the need to create them thus far?

Yes, Apple made it so they can not get in for this very reason. Apples view is that they did not lock the door. They don't have a key. They only made it so that "you" can lock the door and hide the key.

 

[JoeJester]

Do you really think the Gov and Law Enforcement can be trusted with such "Back Doors" would it open a pandora's Box for those trying to protect their intellectual property rights?

Not with contractors like Snowden. The keys would be posted on the wikisecretcode.org before you know it.

 

[ronsimpson]

The keys would be posted on the wikisecretcode.org before you know it.

With a back door.......Snowden might get it. Apple/government would have to keep the key some where safe.

With out a back door:
Each person enters their key at home/in the dark/with out any one watching.
The key they make up. May keep in their head. Could write down on the bathroom wall.
Because Apple does not have the Key(s) it does no good to hack Apple.
Each phone has a different key. You would have to hack each and every phone.

 

[killivolt]

I think my issue is, do I feel more secure.

If a back door exist's on devices the public and those who mean us harm will now be aware it exist's, communications will not stop.

What happens is the form of communication between these monsters will just change and words with cyphers or secret codes are created. Those methods of communication will still thwart Law Enforcement to bring them to justice. I really don't think it will change anything. However, make it more difficult for them to openly communicate. They can still make plans and will continue to hide their true intentions in a veal of secrecy.

kv

 

[jpanhalt]

The litmus test of Mr. Cook's position will be when China demands a backdoor. Reminds one of Google's position early on, until China demanded Google censor its search results.

John

 

[JoeJester]

Actually that is probably a smart move by Apple. Since there is no grand master key, there is nothing they can do but sell the customer a new phone, if they didn't provide for a factory reset.

.

 

[tech master 117]

maybe FBI can throw the phone off a tall building and later find out what's inside hohohohohohoho

 

[jpanhalt]

Morning Update:

The court hearing scheduled for today on the matter of Apple's refusal to comply with a valid court warrant was cancelled as the government reported that a "third" party may have found a back door.

Thank goodness for private enterprise! I hope that "third" party is given some form of witness protection.

John

 

[JoeJester]

Was that really a third party .... or was it the government's way of sending apple to the drawing board to ensure there is no "back door"

 

[killivolt]

Gov Court case is dropped, until of course this incident finds it's way back into court, now that their is precedence or maybe Terrorist will just stop conducting business on iphones and just use another method to plot their devious plans.

kv

 

[bountyhunter]

The government has the legal right to break into phones with legal justification. The have NO RIGHT to force companies to provide back doors through security systems to make them easier to break in.... and they certainly have no right to force comapnies to use their own personnell to develop these back doors.

I suspect the government knew they had a losing hand because they backed down before the court ruled. Once the ruling is in place, the issue would have been settled law (until the supreme court heard it) and I suspect they did not want to risk having the ruling go against them.

After the widespead abuse of "data mining" after they forced the phone companies to help them surveille without a warrant, I suspect they know that courts are going to hear their arguments with a great deal of skepticism.

 

[large_ghostman]

Interesting how they got in, good old fashioned acid! and a microscope.

In the UK we now have the snoopers charter but its been hardly mentioned! the government now collect ALL electronic data, is this for terrorist activity or to quell unrest? two weekends in a row there has been demonstrations in london, at the weekend 200.000 took to the streets to demand the PM steps down, did anyone see it on the TV? NO.

Twitter and social media was alive with it and yet the news channels totally ignored it, funny how the BBC charter was due for renewal last week but has been postponed until after the referendum. Our house is on the market and we are getting ready to leave the UK, unlikely to be soon as houses not selling well around here. No idea where we will go but we wont be staying in the UK, I suggested Syria seeing as most of them have gone should be pretty empty by the time we get there