Apple and phone privacy etc

[SueEllen]

Someone's taken a life. A bit different to driving without documentation. Perspective.

You forget not all convictions are safe.

While you probably can't remember the unsafe IRA convictions, there is loads of information on the US justice system where you haven't got a hope in hell if you are poor especially as they can't be bothered to do proper forensic in lots of cases.

[bobspud]

You forget not all convictions are safe.

While you probably can't remember the unsafe IRA convictions, there is loads of information on the US justice system where you haven't got a hope in hell if you are poor especially as they can't be bothered to do proper forensic in lots of cases.

^ This

And thats before you get into the situation where we are dealing with trials in closed courts where most of the evidence is never seen. Asking my mobile operator for a list of who I call or visits to known terrorist sites is one thing but deciding to just brute force my phone and build a case from that, is not what our justice system was or should be based upon.

[LondonManc]

You forget not all convictions are safe.

While you probably can't remember the unsafe IRA convictions, there is loads of information on the US justice system where you haven't got a hope in hell if you are poor especially as they can't be bothered to do proper forensic in lots of cases.

I remember the Birmingham Six case very well. Paddy Hill's stories of it were fascinating. The case in hand seems a bit more sound to be fair

In terms of the actual ethics of unlocking a perpetrator's phone; for me it should be on a case by case basis to go before a judge to discuss the reasons to or no to "violate" their privacy rather than the heavy-handed give us a skeleton key approach adopted by the Feds. The whole situation has been handled badly from the start.

[Platypus]

^ Some interesting points.

I read a blog which speculated 2 things,

(1) Apple knows how it was done anyway. e.g. NAND mirroring see http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=5966
(2) Apple helped the FBI, but secretly, so that it could save face

[DaveB]

I remember the Birmingham Six case very well. Paddy Hill's stories of it were fascinating. The case in hand seems a bit more sound to be fair

In terms of the actual ethics of unlocking a perpetrator's phone; for me it should be on a case by case basis to go before a judge to discuss the reasons to or no to "violate" their privacy rather than the heavy-handed give us a skeleton key approach adopted by the Feds. The whole situation has been handled badly from the start.

If the owner of the phone is still alive then they already have the power to compel them to reveal the password / pin number under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act in the UK and equivalent legislation in the US. Failure to comply carries a prison sentence all on it's own which gives the authorities years to follow up other sources etc. in the knowledge that the person in question isn't going to be going anywhere.

There is no ethical conundrum about accessing the phone. The dead have no rights. This case was about how they intended to go about it, which was to create a means of accessing the data on the phone that could be applied to any phone thereafter, regardless of the status of the owner.

[Chuck]

This is brilliant for Apple. Both sides have got what they want without resorting to the courts. Apple can also tell their legacy users to upgrade to iPhone 6 (or whatever) for security that can't be hacked (yet).

[LondonManc]

If the owner of the phone is still alive then they already have the power to compel them to reveal the password / pin number under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act in the UK and equivalent legislation in the US. Failure to comply carries a prison sentence all on it's own which gives the authorities years to follow up other sources etc. in the knowledge that the person in question isn't going to be going anywhere.

There is no ethical conundrum about accessing the phone. The dead have no rights. This case was about how they intended to go about it, which was to create a means of accessing the data on the phone that could be applied to any phone thereafter, regardless of the status of the owner.

Scenario:
I've just gunned down 30 in cold blood. Why would I give a toss about doing time for not telling you what my passcode is given I'm clearly in for a long stretch anyway?

[SueEllen]

Scenario:
I've just gunned down 30 in cold blood. Why would I give a toss about doing time for not telling you what my passcode is given I'm clearly in for a long stretch anyway?

You mean like Ian Brady refusing to tell where he buried all his victims?

If you were in the UK with the amount of cameras, electronic transaction and telecommunications data they would be able to piece things together.

[LondonManc]

You mean like Ian Brady refusing to tell where he buried all his victims?

If you were in the UK with the amount of cameras, electronic transaction and telecommunications data they would be able to piece things together.

Correct. Very sad and quite an emotive subject for a friend of mine from Grasscroft, the village near Saddleworth.

In terms of your second comment, does that relate to your first? If so, I'm guessing you've never been up through Delph or Denshaw to the moors.

[SueEllen]

In terms of your second comment, does that relate to your first? If so, I'm guessing you've never been up through Delph or Denshaw to the moors.

Nope.

I couldn't think of a modern day massacre committed by one person/two people where the bodies were hidden.