Apple is shite

[legion]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/27/apple_worker_jailed_for_fouling_flat/

An ex-pat German Apple worker who stored three month’s worth of his own excrement and urine in his luxury apartment has been given a year's worth of porridge by an Irish court.

Robert Kummer, 37, sparked a major public health scare after Gardai initially visited the apartment following a neighbour’s complaints about a foul smell emanating from his Cork pad, the Irish Independent reports.

That is just fucking weird

Like poopy weird

[yanpa]

Rumour has it he was testing the new iCrapper assistant to be released in iOS 13 for optimising your personal poop experience in combination with the iCrotchWatch ("it looks like you are straining more than normal, I'm ordering more fibre right now"), but geeky pun alert the app kept core dumping.

[Coligny]

Weird, poop, german...

Choose 2...

[wagyl]

Weird, poop, german...

Choose 2...

Choose two, get one free!

[Russell]

They can save money by putting him in a jail cell without toilet...

[wagyl]

Twelve months is a bit harsh, I think. it was only three months worth of excrement. If I am constipated on Monday, do I get the rest of the week off?

[Mike Oxlong]

It can't be a coincidence...

[Coligny]

A for apps. and A for Anarchy...

I think that coincidence is called alphabet...

you can add this one too:

action-directe_logo-new.jpg

(French terrorist group Action Directe)

[legion]

“The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.”

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/17/apple-challenges-chilling-demand-decrypt-san-bernadino-iphone

Grandstanding wankstain

Like Tech companies have such huge respect for privacy.

Apple is allowed to provide a cost estimate and rebuttal if it “believes that compliance with the Order would be unreasonably burdensome”.

Paying tax is also such a burden.

Cook concludes: “We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.

That's AMERIKUN democracy folks, not like that substandard democracy they have in Africa, where Apple are happy to benefit from child labour in mining operations.

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jan/19/children-as-young-as-seven-mining-cobalt-for-use-in-smartphones-says-amnesty

Deeeeeep respect that is. That's why Apple pay their taxes to uphold that democracy.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Whether it's a principled stand or grandstanding it's the right move.

[legion]

It's grandstanding

And bullshit, if we still lived in the age of snail mail they would have their letters. But this is digital so it is sacrosanct ? like my fucking arse. When you is busted you is busted and your ass belongs to the law.

If they were kiddie fiddlers hiding porn on their phones would you take the same stance?

And what I find significant is Cook-sama isn't saying we cannot do that, he is saying we won't, so they could do it if it suited them, but they won't. So there is a back door, they just won't give up the key.

[Samurai_Jerk]

It's grandstanding

And bullshit, if we still lived in the age of snail mail they would have their letters. But this is digital so it is sacrosanct ? like my fucking arse. When you is busted you is busted and your ass belongs to the law.

It might be a good business decision. Remember the US isn't the only place where Apple sells iPhones and a lot people and governments around the world aren't too happy with Uncle Sam's spying and might not be as interested in Apple products if they think he has the key to their encryption in his back pocket.

If they were kiddie fiddlers hiding porn on their phones would you take the same stance?

Yes. Crimes against children aren't worse than crimes against anyone else so that illogical emotional argument means nothing to me.

And what I find significant is Cook-sama isn't saying we cannot do that, he is saying we won't, so they could do it if it suited them, but they won't. So there is a back door, they just won't give up the key.

The article I read earlier (I didn't check your link) seemed to be saying that the government wasn't just asking Apple to break into the phone. It was asking them for the technology to do so. That's the problem I have with it.

[legion]

But we trust Apple with that encryption because it makes business sense to them? If their business considerations were better served abusing your privacy would you accept that?

Tech companies believe they are above the law, it shows in their attitude to tax, and now this. They do however enjoy the benefits of the security of a fairly law abiding society. One in which people who kill unarmed people are arrested and their accomplices are investigated.

The police have been seizing hard drives, cracking encryption and using the evidence to put away kiddie fiddlers for years, it's evidence. Where did Apple suddenly get the right to make a lock the that only Apple can open? That's like a bank saying the police can't have access to a suspect's safe deposit box.

They are effectively telling every drug dealer, kiddie fiddler and mass murderer to use an iPhone cos the cops can't crack it. That's a great market to be in Timmy boy.

I hope they bust Cook for obstructing justice and throw him in the can.

[Samurai_Jerk]

If Apple had the key and was refusing to unlock it after a court order, I'd agree. However, the government has ordered them to create a technology they say the don't have to crack the system. That's ridiculous and has nothing to do with tax avoidance.

[Coligny]

If Apple had the key and was refusing to unlock it after a court order, I'd agree. However, the government has ordered them to create a technology they say the don't have to crack the system. That's ridiculous and has nothing to do with tax avoidance.

Last time i checked the crypto specs on iOs apple clearly stated they designed it without backdoor and all they can do is wipe the phone. They did it on the exact purpose of being unable to comply with these kind of request.
so aside for bruteforcing the password that russian hacker can certainly do much better than apple it might be a dead end.

It's not a matter of trusting apple or not, it's a matter of trusting their lawyers to have done everything to keep the company away from any kind of liability... like asking the creator a pgp to decrypt a file without the private key...

if they lied on this...
they are up shit creek without a paddle...

[Mike Oxlong]

Apple Unlocked iPhones for the Feds 70 Times Before
A 2015 court case shows that the tech giant has been willing to play ball with the government
before—and is only stopping now because it might “tarnish the Apple brand.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... efore.html

[Coligny]

Apple Unlocked iPhones for the Feds 70 Times Before
A 2015 court case shows that the tech giant has been willing to play ball with the government
before—and is only stopping now because it might “tarnish the Apple brand.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... efore.html

Apple acknowledged that the phone in the meth case was running version 7 of the iPhone operating system

The company told a federal judge that iPhones running iOS 8 or later are impossible to unlock.

http://www.macworld.com/article/2995974 ... hones.html

“In most cases now and in the future, the government’s requested order would be substantially burdensome, as it would be impossible to perform. For devices running iOS 8 or higher, Apple would not have the technical ability to do what the government requests—take possession of a password protected device from the government and extract unencrypted user data from that device for the government. Among the security features in iOS 8 is a feature that prevents anyone without the device’s passcode from accessing the device’s encrypted data. This includes Apple.”

Users or law enforcement... since the beginning any feature that make apple waste too much time on tech support tend to be removed... That's also how the apple TV 2 lost its YouTube client... too much work... fuck off...

[legion]

If Apple had the key and was refusing to unlock it after a court order, I'd agree. However, the government has ordered them to create a technology they say the don't have to crack the system. That's ridiculous and has nothing to do with tax avoidance.

My point about tax evasion is about their attitude. The tech guys believe they are above the law. They decide whether or not to comply. They now claim to have created encryption that can't be cracked. How dumb is that?

Your rights are protected by law, not technology. When someone murders unarmed civilians they forfeit their right to privacy, end of. Apple are saying their reputation for security trumps the FBI's duty to fully investigate a mass murder.

Jail his ass and put him in the cell with Bubba.

[Samurai_Jerk]

The whole point of encryption is it can't be cracked and last time I checked that wasn't illegal in the US.

Nobody's talking about protecting the privacy of that ISIS wannabe. Especially because in this case that's not even an issue. The phone wasn't his. It was a work phone owned by the county that employed him so he had no expectation of privacy on that phone. Plus he's already dead so you can't violate his rights.

I understood your red herring about tax evasion. That's irrelevant though.

If anyone's grandstanding, it's the FBI. They've been on Apple and other tech companies' asses for years over encryption looking for a case to create precedent so they can force them to weaken security.

[Yokohammer]

... If anyone's grandstanding, it's the FBI. They've been on Apple and other tech companies' asses for years over encryption looking for a case to create precedent so they can force them to weaken security.

That's it right there. They're trying to exploit the public revulsion to what has happened to get their foot in the door, and once they're in, they're staying.

[Wage Slave]

Legion's absolutely correct on this one. Apple need to be brought very firmly to heel and fast - As an example to the others as much as anything. They are basically saying that we can get a commercial advantage from protecting criminals' data, even a mass murderer, so fuck the rest of you. Never mind that the reason we can accumulate and enjoy our vast wealth is rule of law, property rights and all the rest. We have an overriding right to maximise our profit, and shelter them from tax, regardless of what it costs society.

To cast it as a civil liberties issue is absurd and simplistic. Criminals have never enjoyed any right to privacy and nor should they. How would anything ever get investigated otherwise?

Big stick time.

[wuchan]

The tech guys believe they are above the law.

No. Sorry, but you are wrong. They did their research and found a way around the law which is the American way.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Legion's absolutely correct on this one. Apple need to be brought very firmly to heel and fast - As an example to the others as much as anything. They are basically saying that we can get a commercial advantage from protecting criminals' data, even a mass murderer, so fuck the rest of you. Never mind that the reason we can accumulate and enjoy our vast wealth is rule of law, property rights and all the rest. We have an overriding right to maximise our profit, and shelter them from tax, regardless of what it costs society.

To cast it as a civil liberties issue is absurd and simplistic. Criminals have never enjoyed any right to privacy and nor should they. How would anything ever get investigated otherwise?

Big stick time.

Fuck you and that emotional illogical woman legion (Won't somebody think of the children!!!). The government is essentially trying to conscript Apple to do its bidding. Like Coligny said if Apple is lying, they're fucked. And they should be. However, if they really don't have a way to unlock the phone, they shouldn't be forced to try to come up with new technology to do so.

Again, this isn't about the right to privacy of this criminal. If that were so, Apple would have an easy out in this case. I'm pretty sure the county who owns the phone would have no problem with Apple unlocking it. This is about the government's dislike of encryption technology that they don't control.

[Wage Slave]

Legion's absolutely correct on this one. Apple need to be brought very firmly to heel and fast - As an example to the others as much as anything. They are basically saying that we can get a commercial advantage from protecting criminals' data, even a mass murderer, so fuck the rest of you. Never mind that the reason we can accumulate and enjoy our vast wealth is rule of law, property rights and all the rest. We have an overriding right to maximise our profit, and shelter them from tax, regardless of what it costs society.

To cast it as a civil liberties issue is absurd and simplistic. Criminals have never enjoyed any right to privacy and nor should they. How would anything ever get investigated otherwise?

Big stick time.

Fuck you and that emotional illogical woman legion (Won't somebody think of the children!!!). The government is essentially trying to conscript Apple to do its bidding. Like Coligny said if Apple is lying, they're fucked. And they should be. However, if they really don't have a way to unlock the phone, they shouldn't be forced to try to come up with new technology to do so.

Again, this isn't about the right to privacy of this criminal. If that were so, Apple would have an easy out in this case. I'm pretty sure the county who owns the phone would have no problem with Apple unlocking it. This is about the government's dislike of encryption technology that they don't control.

Yeah right. And Apple are doing this because of a higher calling right? It's utter bullshit and the point you are missing completely is the paramount importance of the rule of law than means something like Apple can even exist. If I want to sneak into your apartment and search it, listen to your telephone calls, examine your bank statements and even raid you at 5 in the morning then of course you have an absolute right to protection from me doing it. However, if you are a under investigation by lawful authority because of your criminal activities no such right has ever existed. Or should it. For a company to be seeking to profit from making it possible via a disingenuous route is no more acceptable than a bank cooking up some system whereby clients can enjoy complete confidentiality.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Looks like Apple is in good company (OK, maybe not Google).

With Apple:

ACLU: The civil rights group released a statement calling the order "an unprecedented, unwise, and unlawful move by the government."

Amnesty International: In a similar statement, Amnesty said that Apple is, "right to fight back in this case: the FBI's request... would set a very dangerous precedent. Such backdoors undermine everyone's security and threaten our right to privacy."

Anonymous: On its official Twitter feed, the hacker group has been retweeting Edward Snowden and others sharing concerns about the FBI's request. Anonymous also said the White House, "willfully misrepresents what govt is asking Apple to do in order to expand surveillance powers."

Edward Snowden: The privacy crusader said on Twitter that the FBI is "creating a world where citizens rely on Apple to defend their rights, rather than the other way around." He added: "This is the most important tech case in a decade."

Google (GOOGL): CEO Sundar Pichai said on Twitter that "forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users' privacy" and it "could be a troubling precedent."

Information Technology Industry Council, a Washington advocacy group that represents the interests of the likes of Google, Facebook (FB), Microsoft (MSFT), and others, said in a statement that the fight against terrorism, "is actually strengthened by the security tools and technologies created by the technology sector, so we must tread carefully."

Mozilla, the maker of Firefox: The company tweeted that it stands with Apple, because "we should not set a dangerous precedent."

WhatsApp: CEO Jan Koum wrote on Facebook, "I have always admired Tim Cook for his stance on privacy... We must not allow this dangerous precedent to be set. Today our freedom and our liberty is at stake."

Twitter and Square: Jack Dorsey, chief executive of both the social network and the payments platform, tweeted on Thursday evening, "We stand with Tim Cook and Apple (and thank him for his leadership)!"

Facebook (FB): The company released a statement on Thursday just after Jack Dorsey tweeted his support. The statement says: "We condemn terrorism and have total solidarity with victims of terror. Those who seek to praise, promote, or plan terrorist acts have no place on our services. We also appreciate the difficult and essential work of law enforcement to keep people safe. When we receive lawful requests from these authorities we comply. However, we will continue to fight aggressively against requirements for companies to weaken the security of their systems. These demands would create a chilling precedent and obstruct companies’ efforts to secure their products."

Against Apple:

China: Apple CEO Tim Cook writes in his open letter that, "in the wrong hands," software that could bypass the iPhone's passcode would be dangerous. As the New York Times writes, Apple and other tech companies have argued in the past that, "creating an opening in their products for government investigators would also create a vulnerability that Chinese, Iranian, Russian or North Korean hackers could exploit." Indeed, China, as a nation, is likely on the side of the U.S. in this case because it has proven, time and again, that its government does not place a premium on privacy rights and that it often takes its cues from what the U.S. does. If the FBI's order sets the precedent that even the U.S. believes there are moments when it can intervene and force technology companies to sacrifice privacy, China and other nations may follow.

National Security Agency: Last year, NSA director Mike Rogers joined FBI director James Comey in warning tech companies against employing encryption models that government and law enforcement cannot break when needed.

Donald Trump: In a Fox News appearance, Trump said that he agrees "100 percent" with the court order. "We should open it up," he said about the phone.

The White House: Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the FBI has the White House's full support in this fight, and defended the order based on its scope, saying the government is "simply asking for something that would have an impact on this one device."
So the U.S. government is going up against Apple. And the government's associated arms and entities are, understandably, on the side of the order. But technology companies, and civil rights groups, are almost across the board staunchly siding with Apple.

[Coligny]

They now claim to have created encryption that can't be cracked. How dumb is that?

It's the second time in less than a week that i read a post... And wonder big time... Who ties this guys shoes for him in the morning. And it's not even the usual insanity aboot radioactivity being good for the health or questionning why not eating produce from field tainted by industrial spills (nukular or else) while it can be totally avoided.

Can we have McTojo back... His seat sniffing was making sooo much more sense...

[matsuki]

So dumb it really far on down...Apple's latest OS has a really good lock for your data and there is no master key that Apple holds on to. Feds are demanding Apple create such a key for cases such as this terrorism case because...terrorism? Apple is saying fuck no for a long list of reasons that include liability, security, and basically there is no reason the feds should be able to demand that shit from a private manufacturer. Of course Apple wouldn't want to give in to that demand...and how would that make customers feel about their data when some sort of special backdoor is built in? Real talk, that shit would be exploited and hacked by all kinds of nefarious kinds. If the police catch a criminal and the dude refuses to give them access to his locked up phone, I'm pretty sure they'll handle it like a search warrant and he can end up going to jail over refusing to allow access to it. No need to be able to break into that shit at whim.

[Samurai_Jerk]

If the police catch a criminal and the dude refuses to give them access to his locked up phone, I'm pretty sure they'll handle it like a search warrant and he can end up going to jail over refusing to allow access to it. No need to be able to break into that shit at whim.

Two problems with what you said. In this case the one who knows the password is dead. In the US you are protected from being forced to give up your password by the Fifth Amendment in some cases.

[Mike Oxlong]

Besides, the goverment has a new friend that'll do the job for free.
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mca ... ree-2016-2

[matsuki]

If the police catch a criminal and the dude refuses to give them access to his locked up phone, I'm pretty sure they'll handle it like a search warrant and he can end up going to jail over refusing to allow access to it. No need to be able to break into that shit at whim.

Two problems with what you said. In this case the one who knows the password is dead. In the US you are protected from being forced to give up your password by the Fifth Amendment in some cases.

Dead...in which case a case against them is pretty pointless. (and it can eventually be hacked if the right people are allowed access to it)

As to the 5th amendment, that is a really odd stance to take, especially on company phones...but I can't imagine that type of ruling happening everywhere and it doesn't really prevent authorities from hacking into your device either.