Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

FBI vs Apple

"McAfee:
I have offered to the FBI, for free, to take my team, take that one phone, take it apart, see what's in it, and give it to the FBI,” McAfee said. “That violates no one, it gives them no backdoors, and it cannot be applied to any other iPhone user.”



Why hasn't this offer even made the light of day in the news?


As someone else said, this is more about eroding our privacy than it is about one raghead and his phone.
 
In the limited news that I watch or listen to... If I get wind of it... it HAS hit MSM.!!!


.
 
Why can't we give Apple the phone and let them do their thing to retrieve whatever info they can, and then destroy the phone in a mutually acceptable manner?


They can't access the information. The Justice Department wants apples to create a "back door" into the Operating system so that they can access whatever is on the phone. The problem is that apple sells a ton of product because they offer security. Your personal information is secure, your bank records, your medical records, the wiener pics you snapped last night are all secure.

If they create this backdoor for the justice department, they compromise the entire system. It can't be considered secure because if there is any door, a real hacker can access that point to compromise everything on your phone. Apple ultimately loses sales and business because many people choose their products for this security.

It should be illegal for the justice department to demand that Apple changes their product.
 
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Friday called for a boycott of Apple unless the computer company helps the FBI access encrypted data on the phone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook.

Apple CEO Tim Cook is resisting a judge's order that Apple cooperate, saying the company is being asked to "build a backdoor to the iPhone" that could be used to access other users' phones, not just Farook's device.

"Tim Cook is looking to do a big number, probably to show how liberal he is. But Apple should give up, they should get the security, you'll find other people," Trump said Friday.

Trump is an idiot. Cook is standing up for our constitution. Trump has never even read it.
 
So the next time when lets say 10 psycho muslims go on a co-ordinated shooting spree(like in France) who is going to protect you...Apple or Government.. What does apple do for USA? They have billions in the bank and yet still choose to pay 3rd world wages to build their products in china, Apple does nothing for the USA. Citizens should get away from their anti- government rhetoric and stop being babies and support the FBI. The FBI is not infringing on your civil rights, people make a mountain out of a mole hill, if you can not see the exception in this situation it baffles me. If Tim Cooks family was slaughtered by muslim fanatics, do you honestly think he would not hack a phone to get info...Cmon..
 
So the next time when lets say 10 psycho muslims go on a co-ordinated shooting spree(like in France) who is going to protect you...Apple or Government.. What does apple do for USA? They have billions in the bank and yet still choose to pay 3rd world wages to build their products in china, Apple does nothing for the USA. Citizens should get away from their anti- government rhetoric and stop being babies and support the FBI. The FBI is not infringing on your civil rights, people make a mountain out of a mole hill, if you can not see the exception in this situation it baffles me. If Tim Cooks family was slaughtered by muslim fanatics, do you honestly think he would not hack a phone to get info...Cmon..


So you are saying we should shred our constitution so you feel safe?


You understand if the average person's phone is hacked all of their personal information is compromised? What happens when your phone gets hacked and a terrorist transfers your life saving into his ISIS account? That maybe exaggerated a bit, but most people have their banking info on their phone, retirement plans. All you need to reset a password is usually a linked email account which is also on the phone. Apple creating a back door does not make us safer. It compromises your entire life.


BTW... Federal Judge ruled that Apple does NOT have to grant FBI/Justice Department a backdoor. This is a major victory for the American people.
 
So you are saying we should shred our constitution so you feel safe?


You understand if the average person's phone is hacked all of their personal information is compromised? What happens when your phone gets hacked and a terrorist transfers your life saving into his ISIS account? That maybe exaggerated a bit, but most people have their banking info on their phone, retirement plans. All you need to reset a password is usually a linked email account which is also on the phone. Apple creating a back door does not make us safer. It compromises your entire life.


BTW... Federal Judge ruled that Apple does NOT have to grant FBI/Justice Department a backdoor. This is a major victory for the American people.
Yes a bit exaggerated..lol.. Point is the constitution was made a long time ago and could not forsee what is happening now in the world. Have some compassion for the victims instead of yelling abut your rights which in this case is only about one phone used by a murdering scum bag and has nothing to do with your rights. I do not see anywhere in the constitution about having access to an iphone. Judges also seem to be out of touch with reality..Case in point the affluenza case, horrible misjustice yet a judge did not think so.
 
Yes a bit exaggerated..lol.. Point is the constitution was made a long time ago and could not forsee what is happening now in the world. Have some compassion for the victims instead of yelling abut your rights which in this case is only about one phone used by a murdering scum bag and has nothing to do with your rights. I do not see anywhere in the constitution about having access to an iphone. Judges also seem to be out of touch with reality..Case in point the affluenza case, horrible misjustice yet a judge did not think so.


Have you ever read the constitution? Doesn't sound like it.

The bit about being wrote a long time ago is BS. It is a timeless document that when originally wrote was meant to stand the test of time and evolving conditions. Your argument is what everyone (Dems) say about the 2nd amendment. That was wrote a long time ago and we no longer need guns to protect ourselves, therefor we should eliminate the 2nd amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Illegal search and seizure of Apple's proprietary property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence (sic) to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Illegal seizure of Apple's Property (through a court order demanding they change their code).


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Apple's free speech (code) is protected.


I have no issue with the justice department breaking into this phone to obtain information. I have issue with them REQUIRING Apple to change their code and programming to allow them access.

This is the equivalent of the Justice Department demanding that everyone's house be keyed so it contains a Master key so the FBI can enter your house whenever they like to perform a search.
 
Have you ever read the constitution? Doesn't sound like it.

The bit about being wrote a long time ago is BS. It is a timeless document that when originally wrote was meant to stand the test of time and evolving conditions. Your argument is what everyone (Dems) say about the 2nd amendment. That was wrote a long time ago and we no longer need guns to protect ourselves, therefor we should eliminate the 2nd amendment.



Illegal search and seizure of Apple's proprietary property



Illegal seizure of Apple's Property (through a court order demanding they change their code).




Apple's free speech (code) is protected.


I have no issue with the justice department breaking into this phone to obtain information. I have issue with them REQUIRING Apple to change their code and programming to allow them access.

This is the equivalent of the Justice Department demanding that everyone's house be keyed so it contains a Master key so the FBI can enter your house whenever they like to perform a search.
You just miss read your own quote.
It's not illegal search and seizure.
It's unreasonable search and seizure.
As far as others have mentioned about information on their smart phones. I don't put financial or important personal info on my phone. I don't see the need.
 
A teacher was just fired because students took her phone and found naked selfies of her & they posted them online.
The school board said that she was fired for NOT password protecting her phone.


So if you can be required to password protect your phone, I think it's reasonable to expect that this would actually protect your items on this phone.
 
You just miss read your own quote.
It's not illegal search and seizure.
It's unreasonable search and seizure.
As far as others have mentioned about information on their smart phones. I don't put financial or important personal info on my phone. I don't see the need.



Same difference, and just because you don't do it, doesn't mean it should or should not be protected.

My next door neighbor doesn't have any guns, I guess that means we should just do away with the 2nd amendment?
 
A teacher was just fired because students took her phone and found naked selfies of her & they posted them online.
The school board said that she was fired for NOT password protecting her phone.


So if you can be required to password protect your phone, I think it's reasonable to expect that this would actually protect your items on this phone.

To me this seems like if you broke into someones house, stole personal items and then I was fired for it... I mean, im not saying its smart, but wtf.

Like saying its your fault that someone got in your truck when you ran into the gas station and drove off. Its not theirs.

That being said, all my sensitive stuff is locked away in locked folders within my phone. I just have a basic screen lock so its easy to flip open and use for actual phone based activities.
 
Yes a bit exaggerated..lol.. Point is the constitution was made a long time ago and could not forsee what is happening now in the world. Have some compassion for the victims instead of yelling abut your rights which in this case is only about one phone used by a murdering scum bag and has nothing to do with your rights. I do not see anywhere in the constitution about having access to an iphone. Judges also seem to be out of touch with reality..Case in point the affluenza case, horrible misjustice yet a judge did not think so.

I have plenty of compassion for the victims, but they have nothing to do with this. Numerous groups including APPLE themselves have said gimme the phone and I will give you the information you want within a number of days/weeks. FBI refuses to hand over the phone because ultimately what they want is a backdoor. They honestly don't give a chit about this one case, they want it so they can use it every time someone has sensitive information on their phones. It turns into a slippery slope where they suddenly can decide what they do or don't need to see without getting authorization from judges.

Although I do agree that our constitution should be updated because the world is so different from back then. Perhaps not though because the essence of what it says is true, but we can't word out every single case hence the need for judges to use their discretion to interpret the law in a just manner.
 
Although I do agree that our constitution should be updated because the world is so different from back then.

I strongly disagree, mostly because people are not as good now as the people who wrote our constitution, and if we open that door, within a couple generations our constitution would be shred to bits and would not resemble the essence of it's original intent.
This is a blueprint for our society, and if someone doesn't agree with it, they are free to seek out a society that better suits their vision.
 
I strongly disagree, mostly because people are not as good now as the people who wrote our constitution, and if we open that door, within a couple generations our constitution would be shred to bits and would not resemble the essence of it's original intent.
This is a blueprint for our society, and if someone doesn't agree with it, they are free to seek out a society that better suits their vision.

Nicely stated, too bad that is not the way things are unfolding...
 
So the FBI cracked the phone, anybody here still worried the FBI wants your phone to snoop in on your boring life if your NOT a suspected terrorist
 
So the FBI cracked the phone, anybody here still worried the FBI wants your phone to snoop in on your boring life if your NOT a suspected terrorist

You mean like they have already been doing to thousands of citizens for years?

Clearly you don't understand this issue, but the real issue was that doing so would compromise security of our phones from hackers and anyone really, not just government spying.

So what information did they get out of this phone and how many lives will it save? I'm betting little to none.
 
Premium Features



Back
Top