Topic: "Freedom isn't Free"

[RevDoc]

 
February 18, 2016
Santiago, Chile
 

Years ago, back in my days at the academy and in the military, I used to hear this phrase “freedom isn’t free” over and over again.

It was almost a sort of motto for a lot of military units-- a self-motivating expression that freedom came at a price, and it was our solemn responsibility to pay that price.

It’s a true statement. Freedom is NOT free.

History shows that the path to liberty almost invariably involves conflict, whether it was the American Revolution, or Brown vs. the Board of Education.

And these conflicts often demand a very steep price from those who fight them.

Today we are in the midst of another great conflict. I’m not talking about hostilities in Syria or even the Global War on Terror.

This conflict is between the individual and the state.

Governments around the world have demonstrated that they are willing to trample on individual liberties with no thought to the larger implications.

They tell us what we can and cannot put in our bodies. They take our children away when they deem us unfit parents in their sole discretion.

They tell us to be afraid of men in caves… or angry teenagers in the desert… or bad people lurking in the night… and then use that fear as an excuse to dismantle the freedoms that previous generations paid such a steep price to achieve.

We’ve now found out that the US government has demanded that Apple, in the words of CEO Tim Cook, “build a backdoor to the iPhone.”

Cook’s letter to customers describes how the government wants to access data on the iPhone of the man who perpetrated the 2015 San Bernadino mass shooting.

Apple’s iPhone operating system automatically encrypts data and only makes it available to a user who knows the password.

Since Apple doesn’t know the shooter’s password, they cannot access the data through normal means.

That’s why the FBI wants them to build a backdoor, and the government has commanded Apple to comply under the authority of a law dating back to 1789.

As Tim Cook points out,
 
“[W]hile the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.
 
“The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data.

“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.”

The government may very well be acting in the interest of ‘protecting the American people’.

And US presidents often point out these days that their #1 responsibility is to keep American safe.

Actually, it’s not.

Nearly all federal officials, including the President, take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic.

That is their #1 responsibility-- to uphold the principles of freedom that define an entire nation.

They have routinely broken that oath, trading other people’s freedom for the illusion of greater security.

It’s easy to sing songs about how free you are… to cheer Lady Gaga’s rendition of the national anthem at the Superbowl when she hits the high note on the word “free”.

But none of that comes at a price.

Our price is making a difficult choice between liberty and security-- to choose fear or freedom.

When we feel that our families’ security is threatened, the knee-jerk reaction is often to say “give the government whatever it needs to make us safe!”

But the harsh reality is that such short-term thinking creates a much more ominous world in the long-term.

And every tacit acquiescence to intrusive government authority is a brick laid on the road to tyranny.
 
Until tomorrow, 

Simon Black
Founder, SovereignMan.com

 
 

[calj737]

I'm a huge Apple fan, not a Tim Cook fan, but applaud him/them on this position. Backdoors have been coded out of software as Security Reviews of Source Code have been conducted under Federal Mandate. Now the FBI wants one put in? Baffling and frightening.

[Duke McDukiedook]

Just send it over to the NSA if you want the data. 

[Redline it]

Freedom, to me is like repression, restraint, limits, and terrorism. It's all my mind of what I want to believe about it, and whether or not I want to let it control me. When one is followed or chased, the others become insanely out of perspective. Freedom: just another word for control.

[calj737]

Freedom, to me is like repression, restraint, limits, and terrorism. It's all my mind of what I want to believe about it, and whether or not I want to let it control me. When one is followed or chased, the others become insanely out of perspective. Freedom: just another word for control.

Kind of the whole point of the article... That your freedom has been ceded away and taken without your knowledge or consciousness.

[Duke McDukiedook]

Apple is full of crap. Not mentioned is they have unlocked IPhones on 50 different occasions for law enforcement.

[calj737]

Apple is full of crap. Not mentioned is they have unlocked IPhones on 50 different occasions for law enforcement.

Previous O/S and hardware versions. Latest and greatest products encrypt by default. Apple doesn't have the certificate keys, only the user does. Do pay attention...

[BobbyR]

I am so tired of hearing about 9/11. I am in NY, I saw the towers come down, lost neighbors in that attack. They use it as a way to convince you, or scare you into giving up your privacy.

[JWExperience]

Pay attention to what? If they did it 50 times before...getting into people's information...what's difference does it make if it's encrypted this time.
I'm not saying I agree with apple or the fbi but why be a hypocrite about it now and what if they found info about a future attack and saved 14 other lives by checking this one terrorist phone. Hopefully it wouldn't be used to get other citizens info but this is big brother were talking about.
Just playing devils advocate kinda.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grcamna2]

Truth & Knowledge is Power and that brings us to Choices 

[Ichiban 4]

Here's something I came across recently.
 
Not your typical take on "freedom"..but enough stuff in there to make one ponder (it's also akin to what Soichiro Honda said about freedom and profit BTW) http://www.kanbun.org/chienowa/eng/interview/kato.html

Ichi
 

[demon78]

Ichi some of the things discussed I "know" organically from just living and thinking. I have held the heretical view that unrestrained growth is the same as cancer there has to be a balance between growth and people, as far as freedom goes same thing complete freedom is great until an complete #$%* gets it and then there has to be limits so that everyone else is not damaged by afore mentioned #$%* and now we get to the problem who manages the growth and the #$%*. Ideally it should come from the ground up (the family) it certainly can't come from religion which has historically failed to provide the the underpinnings (probably because of the competing agendas and factions) so maybe a standard philosophy/ethical guide line should be taught from kindergarden up to p.h.d. mandated by society and no exceptions. I would view it the same as universal immunization ( the ones that don't get immunized are a threat to the rest of us) and the ones that don't subscribe to an universal ethical standard are a threat to all of us. Some will scream "communism, you are restricting my rights" all I can say to that what makes your rights more important than mine and societies, this shift has to be subtle, gradual and from the very bottom because there is no way it could be implemented by an external force, the push back would be enormous. Utopian, yep, but everyone has to realize that they are responsible/interconnected with the world and inhabitants in other words time to grow up.
Bill the demon.

[calj737]

Pay attention to what? If they did it 50 times before...getting into people's information...what's difference does it make if it's encrypted this time.
I'm not saying I agree with apple or the fbi but why be a hypocrite about it now and what if they found info about a future attack and saved 14 other lives by checking this one terrorist phone. Hopefully it wouldn't be used to get other citizens info but this is big brother were talking about.
Just playing devils advocate kinda.

Because it is encrypted by the USER, not by Apple makes all the difference. "Pay attention" to Apple's explanation as to why this time is different. If you don't understand encryption technology, then I understand your confusion over why they can or can not unlock the phone. But simply reading a headline doesn't inform someone well enough over technology matters to be versed in a technical discussion.

I've been dealing with Classified computing, Encryption and Secure Computing Facilities for almost 30 years, believe me when I tell you, the fact the user encrypted it and no one else can decrypt it makes the device safer. And its precisely a mandate by the Feds that Apple has addressed to allow their device to be eligible for use in secure transmissions. They (the Feds) want it both ways; secure, but breakable.

If Apple did actually hack into their own phones/tablets defeating the security they've developed, then any device is now vulnerable to being hacked by anyone, not simply under a court order. This would be akin to a manufacturer of a safe that you install at home having a master code to unlock your safe. Would you want that? I wouldn't. Drill it open, cut it open, knock yourself out. But be prepared to damage the contents (which is exactly how Apple's device encryption works) and come away with nothing.

As for people who use a computer at work or home and fall prey to hackers and identity theft, if you encrypted the contents of your hard drive, you'd be heaps safer. Should the data be exfiltrated, the fact that its encrypted makes it unusable and worthless. Its the single largest growth of technology in the market to increase and extend the security of all data.

[chewbacca5000]

I'm a huge Apple fan, not a Tim Cook fan, but applaud him/them on this position. Backdoors have been coded out of software as Security Reviews of Source Code have been conducted under Federal Mandate. Now the FBI wants one put in? Baffling and frightening.

The backdoor is available to anyone who knows it is there.  With all this publicity the whole world will know the outcome.  If apple does install a backdoor every would be criminal will be searching for it.

[Duke McDukiedook]

I'm a huge Apple fan, not a Tim Cook fan, but applaud him/them on this position. Backdoors have been coded out of software as Security Reviews of Source Code have been conducted under Federal Mandate. Now the FBI wants one put in? Baffling and frightening.

The backdoor is available to anyone who knows it is there.  With all this publicity the whole world will know the outcome.  If apple does install a backdoor every would be criminal will be searching for it.

Absolutely. No manufacturer of such equipment worth their salt does not put one in. Past a certain OS revision the way I understand it is all Iphones' drives are encrypted by default with the user's password or fingerprint being their key.

And I can pretty much guarantee the NSA has the crack code to just about anything under the sun.

[BobbyR]

I'm a huge Apple fan, not a Tim Cook fan, but applaud him/them on this position. Backdoors have been coded out of software as Security Reviews of Source Code have been conducted under Federal Mandate. Now the FBI wants one put in? Baffling and frightening.

The backdoor is available to anyone who knows it is there.  With all this publicity the whole world will know the outcome.  If apple does install a backdoor every would be criminal will be searching for it.

Absolutely. No manufacturer of such equipment worth their salt does not put one in. Past a certain OS revision the way I understand it is all Iphones' drives are encrypted by default with the user's password or fingerprint being their key.

And I can pretty much guarantee the NSA has the crack code to just about anything under the sun.

I think you give the NSA a bit too much credit, and Apple not enough. This new OS is unique in that you get I believe 8 tries and then it destroys the data.

If that were not the case they would simply do a brute force attack on the phone where they have a program that can make an infinate number of random sequences until they get the right one.

"Freedom is not Free" can also mean you side on personal privacy, and you will have a risk something will happen. i for one am willing to take the risk.   

[Duke McDukiedook]

And I don't think you give them enough. Codes and encryption is what they are about.
Just remember this- NOTHING is unhackable.

[calj737]

And I don't think you give them enough. Codes and encryption is what they are about.
Just remember this- NOTHING is unhackable.

You know nothing about encryption if that is your position. The issue isn't whether a brute force attack will decrypt the data, the issue is you only get 10 efforts to incorrectly guess the passcode. After 10, the OS automatically formats the drive and wipes the data. Gone forever since its FLASH storage. The encryption algorithm Apple uses for drive encryption is proprietary as well. So it may well 256-bit or even 512-bit, they won't say. But at 256-bit, with a 6 digit passcode, you're looking at something on the order of 2,000 MIP Years to decrypt. Does the NSA have this computing power? Yep, as do other agencies. But they won't get it done within 9 efforts of guessing a 6-digit numerical code.

Had the FBI found the phone and used the fingerprint of the "owner" within 48 hours to unlock the phone, it would not be an issue. Another security feature to prevent fingerprint hacks is the timing out of access without the passcode.

[JWExperience]

Calj, you're arguing the tech and I'm arguing the hypocrisy end. I'm not saying it's right either way. But prior breaches of privacy on the part of Apple for apparent due cause have already set a precedent.
If the encryption end of it is sooooo important and also the reason why the apparent violation of a terrorists rights is such a difficult thing for some to comprehend, why doesn't Tim Cook say he refuses to unlock due to the encryption. Seems to me if it's as important as you think then the ceo of Apple would be smart enough to tell everyone that.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HondaMan]

Speaking as one who has been building computers from the soldering iron in 1970 until these days, including having written 2 operating systems (albeit small ones) from scratch, and LONG before the "PC" was even dreamed up: while digitally-stored information can always be recovered, the method by which it may also be encrypted before writing or reading, and thus encrypted/decoded by even something as simple as an XOR or NXOR of each byte, alternating by a rotating code, can turn the data into nothing but random bits on a substrate.

In 'English' this means: it is entirely possible to permanently encrypt and hide data, even making it self-destruct if the read of that data is not done with the proper 'key'. If the 'key' is not known, it can be anything under the sun, which then makes it a googolplex combination of different versions, even with a simple 8-bit encryption word.

I, for one, congratulate Apple. There is no immorality in making one's own data safe.

[calj737]

What Tim Cook has said is, they (Apple) don't have the means to unlock the phone because its encrypted. Unlike prior devices and versions of the O/S, they have eliminated the "backdoors" for security and data privacy reasons. They (Apple) would have to build/code a device to link to the phone and attempt to bypass the 10x safety wipe. He (Cook) is also adamant that doing so (creating this backdoor) is a very bad idea as it opens every device they make to security vulnerabilities. No way around it. I don't believe he is objecting based upon "Big Brother paranoia" but certainly does raise the issue for consideration (privacy&liberty vs "national security").

This latest version of their security is a critical feature of ApplePay and their iCloud data security assurance. For them to modify their code to satisfy the FBI, every customer in the world is now at risk (not from the FBI) but from hackers, thieves and potentially governments. And if you think this is a "one and done" event, you're naive and dead wrong (not directed at any single person). Every Law Enforcement agency in the world where Apple products are used or sold will now have legal precedent to force Apple to decrypt any phone or device or provide these Agencies with the means to do so. Think about that. No technology created in a lab stays in a lab.

JW- I'm not arguing either side. I'm explaining why the technical hurdle is in place and the hypocrisy of the Federal Government in their technical standards. This would be akin to forcing Glock to make the Model 19 compatible with a ball and cap simply to prevent an officer from shooting too many rounds. The means doesn't justify the ends (technically). And whats the point of a semi-auto handgun in a Law Enforcement agent's hand anyone? To protect. Encryption is protection. Even if the "datA" being encrypted belongs to a psycho.

JW, you were Law Enforcement, so let me pose this to your trained mind:
This terrorist spent months planning this event. He did dry runs. Upon the day in question, he executed his plan but before doing so, destroyed beyond recovery his personal cell phone, his personal computers, and obfuscated as much other background as he could. Yet, he leaves a company issued device (County iPhone) operating and in plain sight. Do you really believe this guy used that device for planning or communicating his dastardly plans? Do you really believe that his phone records, text records, browsing history (these can/have all been subpoenaed already) wouldn't indicate with great clarity the presence of malicious data? I'll bet you $1 to a donut (I know cops like donuts  ) that theres is ZERO meaningful data on that phone. So its all a moot exercise over "principle" and not reality.

I'm a huge fan of legitimate national security technology. But I also like my privacy. And I use encryption on everything not to prevent the Feds from seeing my stuff, but to prevent hackers from being able to use it. And it's what I encourage every single person I interact with professionally to do. Including all your personnel records, medical records, credit data, work history, etc. It makes you safer.

[JWExperience]

I hate donuts.
My TRAINED mind would not stop investigating based on a hunch that the terrorist had no information on that phone. I do believe that he destroyed any information to be found but I would investigate as far as I could or I would feel like I was failing to do my due diligence. Can you tell anyone on this site the who, what, where, etc. of the terrorists plan? Why ask me these nonsense questions then? This is the reason for a thorough investigation.
If a family member of yours was killed in that attack, would you be ok with the fbi not looking into every lead? What if it saved future lives?
This instance is not a case of the big bad government violating a poor terrorists rights if they have cause. That's how I feel. Sorry if it hurts your feelings. Any assumptions as to what hackers or the government will do afterwards are just that...assumptions.
I do not want innocent people having their stuff hacked either. I joined this thread playing devils advocate and it's very hard to keep doing that when people use hypothetical situations or false assumptions to base their arguments upon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duanob]

I'm not sure why the FEDS couldn't just get a warrant for that one particular phone. Personally I would like to know if these two terrorists had help and are part of a bigger group inside the US borders.

i wouldn't be interested in any other phones until they are part of evidence of another terror plot like this example.

[calj737]

What if it saved future lives?
This instance is not a case of the big bad government violating a poor terrorists rights if they have cause. That's how I feel. Sorry if it hurts your feelings. Any assumptions as to what hackers or the government will do afterwards are just that...assumptions.

But aren't these points you make also assumptions? And there's far more recent evidence of our Federal Government over-reaching their authority, that is not an assumption but a fact.

Duanob- they have a warrant for that single phone. But it's locked and encrypted and nobody has the key. I guess you've missed the whole point of this topic.

[JWExperience]

Are you saying that the authorities don't have a right to investigate the terrorist in this case? I'm not sure what assumption I made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk