Another statist hachet job. Not comparable to the feds demands at all.

This so reminds me of that scene in Atlas Shrugged when the police try to force John Galt to open the door to his household lab. When he refuses, and they break down the door, all the room's contents are immediately turned to dust.

There is a question that so far no one has asked. "Is it possible to do what Apple is being asked to do?" As I understand it the phone in question has the latest version of Apple's encryption software. A friend that is in a position to know such things tells me that Apple went to great lengths to create a system that was so unbreakable that even if you know exactly how it works it is still impossible to crack. If this is the case the real reason that Apple is resisting the court order is that they are unable to comply not that they don't want to.

Be it known, Ladies and Gentlemen, that there exists a class of encryption technology which by its essence will stop agencies like the FBI in its tracks, and will even disarm their legal powers.

It's called Plausible Deniability Encryption, and was invented by a small team of people led by software developer, WikiLeaks founder and political fugitive Julian Assange.

How Plausible Deniability Encryption works is by letting the user set as many different passwords as they like. Each password, if entered, reveals different areas of data. Unless a password is entered, there is no technical or mathematical proof that an area of data even exists. Government agents, when inspecting a Plausible Deniability data store, will just see random gibberish. They will have no idea whether there are zero, one, two or even 30 separate data areas. The only way to prove a data area actually exists is to first posses the password which unlocks it.

If a suspect is being detained and pressured to disclose "the decryption password", they can provide one or two passwords to unlock a couple of the data areas, but only ones of low to medium sensitivity. For instance, a political activist may choose to unlock a semi-sensitive area that will expose them to a month in prison, but the feds won't be able to prove that more sensitive data - the 20 years in supermax kind - even exists.

I'm not sure how many Plausible Deniability Encryption products there are out in the wild - fairly few if any at the moment I'm guessing.

I wrote a working proof-of-concept prototype for one, inspired by aspects of Assange's first version, but mothballed the project due to lack of funds. At the time, it got a good write-up in the tech blogs, so it was sad to let it go. What are your thoughts about the commercial viability of such a project, were I to resurrect it and fundraise for it?

IF apple has given its source code to china, then
the FBI should have it by now. . or else, they are
falling behind in the international spy race. -- j

p.s. whatever happened to the world in which
the FBI worked inside the u.s. and the CIA
worked outside?
.

Self interest. China offers Apple business opportunities. Us govt just offers hassles

The two key words of the article are "if true."
Did Apple give the info to China? Are the Apple people so greedy that they'd break their own business rules in order to acquire a market? If so, to hell with them. If on the other hand, they have maintained their security protocols to everyone, we can say hurray for them, and the government has no right to the information under any form of law congruent with the Constitution. One thing that hasn't been explored in the article is how badly China wants iPhones. Are they willing to give up the use of them and the commerce they will bring over what they know is a highly unlikely situation? For now, I'm with Apple.

It's good this scenario has come up. It will help the mobile vendors raise the bar with personal security, especially since there's a clear market demand for it.
So what next? Banning the sale of uncrackable mobile devices?

Different country, different rules, no power, no protection and a government that would not hesitate to hag your butt?

Would pulling out of china been a option or was it more important to keep the population of a communist country connected to the rest of the world?
Not that I think Apple thinks this way, rather I'd hope that at least someone brought up that thought.

Apple has no real leverage in China. It does is a supposedly free country that it is home that is supposed to obey the 4th Amendment. There are many things I don't like so much about Apple. But in this case they are taking an admirable ethical stance and I am deeply grateful that they are.

I have been trying to keep track of this issue, and for me it now boils down to, "The owner of the phone has asked that it be unlocked." so the Feds asking Apple to help access the contents of the phone is akin to the cops coming to my home and calling a locksmith to open my front door when I have accidentally locked myself out:
'I' as the owner, have requested access to something that is 'mine' and, in this case, the gov is working with 'me' (aka County of San Bernadino) to accomplish that.

Insofar as China is concerned, the article offered suppositions but no proof. I think that it is going to do more damage to socialism in China for people to have iphones even if their gov has one more way of keeping track of their people. Do you know about the codes that the Chinese people are spontaneously developing to keep from being tagged by trigger word searches? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrcaH...

Those river-mud-horses are not able to keep the lid on the Chinese people.

Jan

Fight the battles you can win.