Avatar_feed
Responses: 4
SP5 Michael Rathbun
5
5
0
Edited >1 y ago
The issue, as stated by myself and others with bigger net.security racks, is that what the FBI wants, if they force it, will not benefit them in the slightest in anything but the very short term.

If there is a backdoor for Law Enforcement, it is a backdoor for a potentially infinite number of other players. Such as any of the intelligence and enforcement agencies in Iran. Or the Religious Police of the KSA.

No, you can't just break one phone without creating a platform for breaking all phones.

Strong encryption is here to stay. If you force manufacturers to cripple their products, other techniques will be developed and employed.

And none of those will come from entities you can assault, such as Apple.

In fact, some systems will arise that you won't even know are there.

Live with it, because, if you don't, it will become "more powerful than you can possibly imagine"..
(5)
Comment
(0)
SFC Contract Administrator
SFC (Join to see)
>1 y
SP5 Michael Rathbun thank you for sharing and I a agree 110% on your response. Well said and profoundly stated and conveyed!
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar_small
CSM Charles Hayden
3
3
0
We should all know that the iPhonecin question was property of the County of San Bernardino, CA. THE PHONE NOT BEING PRIVATELY OWNED CHANGES THE EQUATION?
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar_small
LTC Stephen F.
2
2
0
That is interesting SFC (Join to see) Michael Hayden, who as director of the NSA installed and still defends the controversial surveillance program to collect telephone metadata on millions of Americans, says he opposes proposals to force Apple and other tech companies to install "back doors" in digital devices to help law enforcement.
This seems to at at conflict with the FBI about this issue since teh FBI wants Apple to comply at least in their public statements.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar_small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

Are you sure you wish to convert this post?

close