
Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone - phesse14
http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/22/bill-gates-says-apple-should-unlock-the-iphone/
======
acqq
In Tim Cook's words, from his latest letter to the employees:

"Some advocates of the government’s order want us to roll back data
protections to iOS 7, which we released in September 2013. Starting with iOS
8, we began encrypting data in a way that not even the iPhone itself can read
without the user’s passcode, so if it is lost or stolen, our personal data,
conversations, financial and health information are far more secure. We all
know that turning back the clock on that progress would be a terrible idea."

The last released non-beta iOS is 9.2.

Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

~~~
chroma
Your Cook quote is DH3 on the disagreement hierarchy.[1] I agree with it, but
it doesn't engage with any arguments for or against the court order.

> Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and draw
the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth? I think it's
far more likely that he believes what he says he believes.

As much as the HN crowd likes to side with Apple on this matter, reasonable
people can disagree about what's best. I hope Gates's position causes people
to reflect on _why_ they have the opinion they do. Gates doesn't have some
shady ulterior motive. He's simply stating his opinion on the matter, and
using some hastily-conceived analogies to explain it to the general public.
That's all.

1\. [http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html](http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html)

~~~
acqq
> > Bill Gates still owns some 13 billions in Microsoft stocks.

> Do you really think Gates would dissemble, throw privacy under a bus, and
> draw the ire of his peers... just for a potential bump in net worth?

Check which companies sided with Apple this time and which didn't, then
compare with some other older cases, for example after Snowden's revelations,
then you tell me how you see the current state this time.

Almost certainly the phone doesn't contain anything relevant: it was just a
business phone of the killer who actually took care to destroy his private
phone and computer, the backup data out of the phone is already owned by the
FBI and they just clumsily locked themselves out.

Even if I can imagine Gates believes what he says the context matters and
shouldn't be left unmentioned. Interests and affiliations of somebody
influential making the public statement are certainly important to mention.
Also to compare, Cook was almost presented guilty for trying to preserve the
products of his company.

------
zer01
>"It is no different than [the question of] should anybody ever have been able
to tell the phone company to get information, should anybody be able to get at
bank records,” he said. “Let’s say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk
drive and said ‘don’t make me cut this ribbon because you’ll make me cut it
many times’."

Seriously? It's absolutely different (not to mention his ribbon analogy makes
no sense at all). I see all of this more a question of "can Americans actually
have anything remain private on a commercial device?". I don't want anyone but
me to have unfettered access to my data, regardless of if it's phone records,
bank info, or my phone's contents.

Here's hoping that the iPhone 7 has a secure enclave that either 1.) deletes
keys on firmware flash, or 2.) doesn't allow it to be upgraded ever.

~~~
saurik
The reality is that Apple already has unfettered access to this device: they
left themselves a backdoor to which only they have the key, in the form of a
"secure" update mechanism that is so "secure" that even the user can't control
it, only Apple can. To me the actual question here is whether the FBI should
be allowed to ask and then force Apple to use the backdoor Apple built into
their product; Apple painting this as if they are being asked to build a
backdoor instead of use an existing one is them being nothing more than
dishonest in an attempt to twist the story and shift the blame. So yes: I
think it is fair to describe the security of this device, from the perspective
of Apple, as nothing more than a ribbon, as Apple already has "unfettered
access to [your] data". Apple trusts users so little that they don't give
users control of the hardware they _own_... this is frankly a good lesson on
them that this is responsibility they should never have hoarded. "Here's
hoping that the iPhone 7 no longer has a backdoor that is controlled by
Apple."

~~~
NEDM64
Sure. It's a Backdoor that only you and Apple know of. Right?

~~~
saurik
No: it is a backdoor that everyone in the world knows of, including the FBI,
which is why this is even a question. Apple is the only party allowed to
change the software running on the device, using their software update
encryption key: _this is a backdoor into at least this device (an iPhone 5C)_.

------
citizensixteen
I do not understand why Bill Gates would take a contrary position to Silicon
Valley / tech community on this issue. Any insight into why he is taking this
stance?

What I have found even more confusing is why the FBI hasn't asked the NSA for
help. The NSA's thousands of skilled hackers simply can't break into an old
iPhone?

~~~
madaxe_again
Because the US government is Microsoft's biggest customer by a country mile.

Hand that feeds you and all that.

The FBI already have the info they need, don't need nsa's help, this is purely
about setting a precedent.

~~~
lazaroclapp
Gates is not in charge of Microsoft anymore... and hasn't been for a long
while.

Actually, my best hypothesis is that, remembering that the Gates Foundation,
which is the organization Gates is actually involved with now, works a lot in
government/policy circles, Bill himself might have views that are more common
within that circle that within the tech community. Whether that means that he
is taking this point because he has more information, less information or just
different priorities, I do not know. I don't even remember if Gates took any
position on the original crypto wars.

I personally find that the balance of arguments weights much heavier on the
side of security and privacy, versus surveillance, and that creating this tool
and setting this particular precedent would do more harm than good. I can
still imagine a world in which Gates disagrees with that without being
knowingly evil, though.

Actually, when it comes to Gates in particular, I admit that when I was
younger I spent a long time thinking of him as "knowingly evil" (or at least
selfish to a extreme degree) for completely different reasons. Later I
realized that he might have simply put priority on different ethical axioms
than my high-school self did... and in the balance of things might end up
having been a higher positive force in the world than a negative one, by far,
see e.g.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Eradication_efforts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Eradication_efforts)
. This doesn't mean I agree with him on the issue at hand, though.

~~~
madaxe_again
He's not in charge of, but still holds at least $12bn of MS stock, on which a
lot of his wealth is leveraged and predicated, which would certainly give him
a vested interest in defending microsoft's interests, which are the
government's interests.

You may well be right however that the circle he runs in has influenced his
stance on this too, however he has historically taken a pro-government anti-
knowledge stance - see [http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-
the-roll...](http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the-rolling-
stone-interview-20140313?page=2) for instance in which he trots out the
"Snowden is a traitor who needs to come home for a fair trial" rhetoric.

------
Johnny555
Does he feel that Apple should also unlock the 12 other phones the Justice
Department is reportedly also filing court orders for?

[http://gizmodo.com/justice-department-forcing-apple-to-
unloc...](http://gizmodo.com/justice-department-forcing-apple-to-unlock-
about-12-oth-1760749507) The Justice Department is pursuing court orders to
force Apple Inc. to help investigators extract data from iPhones in about a
dozen undisclosed cases around the country...

And what about when authorities in the UK also have cases where they "need"
phones to be unlocked? And how about China? And every other government in the
world that may want to have phones unlocked?

------
somberi
In an interview with Rolling Stone's Jeff Goodell, the Microsoft co-founder
and richest man in the world did not mince words when asked if he considered
whether Snowden is a hero or a traitor.

"I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn't characterize him as a
hero," Gates said. "If he wanted to raise the issues and stay in the country
and engage in civil disobedience or something of that kind, or if he had been
careful in terms of what he had released, then it would fit more of the model
of 'OK, I'm really trying to improve things.' You won't find much admiration
from me."

Gates said that there "has to be a debate" about government snooping, but
indicated that some aspects of government surveillance are best left a secret.

Microsoft has seen quite a bit of controversy regarding its alleged
cooperation with the NSA. Last July, the Guardian reported that Microsoft had
aided both the NSA and FBI in accessing user data, including providing video
and audio conversations from Skype, Microsoft's video chat service. A Der
Spiegel report in December also found that the NSA would use fake Windows
error messages to spy on people.

Ref: [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-gates-
snowden_n_496...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-gates-
snowden_n_4964311.html?section=india)

[http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the-
roll...](http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/bill-gates-the-rolling-
stone-interview-20140313)

------
castell
@dang: why is this news not on the frontpage? I found out about this news on a
local newspaper site - not good :(

So how many people flagged this news? Which company IP address range were
involved? Keep an eye on that. Thanks.

It's on 285. right now:

    
    
      Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock the iPhone (techcrunch.com)
      59 points by phesse14 5 hours ago 91 comments
    

What's going on?

On 212:

    
    
      Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone for FBI (macrumors.com) 
      13 points by samstokes 7 hours ago 8 comments  
    

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11157328](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11157328)

And on 1:

    
    
      Bill Gates calls for terror data debate (bbc.com) 
      22 points by lentil_soup 52 minutes ago 4 comments  
    

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11158647](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11158647)

------
StreamBright
I disagree with Gates on this one, I think in the US that has common law legal
systems, setting the precedent by unlocking (if possible) the iphone in
question would be disastrous.

~~~
repsilat
Legal precedents are only set in legal judgements, aren't they? I think Apple
unlocking the phone would only set a cultural precedent.

~~~
StreamBright
Isn't there a court case opened against Apple on this one? Sorry my legal
knowledge is very limited but I think the official FBI request goes through a
court. Maybe I am wrong, if somebody has the details I would love to read
about it more.

------
p01926
So why is Microsoft fighting us.gov regarding access to data stored in another
country? Isn't that, to the layman, just another variety of ribbon-wrapped
box. Gates should know that, just like extra-jurisdictional data retrieval,
signed malware data retrieval is dangerous, bad business and awful precedent.
He must publicly set the record straight for his company's stance to have any
credibility.

~~~
simonh
The reason Microsoft isn't releasing information stored in other countries is
because doing so would break the law in those other countries. It would open
Microsoft and its employees to prosecution in those countries.

I disagree with Bill on phone security and agree with Apple's stance, but even
so it's pretty clear to me that Microsoft has a stronger case and literally
has no choice but to deny the US DOJ access to records held abroad.

------
saiya-jin
well, what a coincidence, I guess MS phones aren't selling well, so let's
undermine competition a bit.

not for a second do I suspect mr gates to be stupid or not comprehending
situation in full detail, with all possible consequences. and here I thought
that he went from most hated IT guy on this planet in '90s to somebody
actually concerned about good of the mankind. can somebody shed some light
what would be his true motivations for these statements?

------
abpavel
Bill Gates: "Let's say the bank had tied a ribbon round the disk drive and
said 'don't make me cut this ribbon because you'll make me cut it many times'"

...Well, that sums up his understanding of the the encryption technology. Then
what are we to expect of the general public, when even Bill Gates sees a
"ribbon around a disk drive"?

~~~
chroma
I thought it was quite clear that Gates was making an analogy for non-
technical readers. He doesn't really think of encrypted devices that way.

Unfortunately, there's no way Gates can win here. If he uses technical
language, journalists and/or readers won't understand. Or worse: they'll
misunderstand his views. If he uses simplistic analogies, he invites mockery
from technical readers.

~~~
camillomiller
Yes, but in the second case he'll win the sympathy of the laymen who will
think "hey, if even bill gates says they're wrong, maybe they're wrong. The
guy's a genius". These people are less vocal than tech readers, but they
vastly outnumber them.

~~~
chroma
I doubt Gates has any hidden motive behind his statements. He's just saying
something he believes to be true, while trying to make sure others understand
him. Why would he care about getting sympathy from laymen? He's the richest
person on the planet. He's got more important stuff to do, like sparing
millions of people from disease, poverty, and hunger.

~~~
camillomiller
Then it's even less understandable why should he muddle the waters with an ill
conceived analogy like the "ribbon around a hard drive" one.

------
arihant
No, Mr. Gates, cutting this ribbon would mean that all the other ribbons are
cut by default. Not just by your allies, but by your not-so-friends in North
Korea.

It's not about cutting a ribbon. It's about putting a hard drive in a box that
self destructs when you try to open it. What your friends are asking is not to
cut a ribbon, but to make the box open safely with a master key. Your
government could not even stop wikileaks and your own employee to turn against
you -- how do you expect the world to trust them with master key?

Overreaching beyond means and have it blow up in the face is quickly becoming
an American virtue in the 21st century.

------
frik
Wasn't MSFT the first company to hand over all data to a three letter agency?
Yes it was. So no surprise. Win10 was born in this context too. And he still
owns billions worth of its stock.

------
dano
Considering Windows 10 full disk encryption sends the keys to Microsoft, I am
not surprised.

[https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-
window...](https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-windows-
computer-microsoft-probably-has-your-encryption-key/)

------
dingo_bat
Can anybody explain why unlocking just this specific phone is bad? Can't we
decide on a case-by-case basis? It's not like Apple is being asked to backdoor
all Iphones so FBI can read everyone's data. Just this specific one ordered by
court. What am I missing?

~~~
pfg
First of all, it sets a precedent that companies can be forced to create
software that willfully compromises their security mechanisms. This is very
much different from your typical data dump ordered by a judge. It's quite
likely that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies would use such a
precedent in many future cases.

Second, it's unclear how easy it would be to create firmware that only works
on a specific device. What if there's a bug, or what if someone finds a way to
spoof the device ID that would probably be checked? It could very well end up
being a backdoor for all iPhones after all (or, at least, for all iPhones
without a Secure Enclave).

This EFF article has a couple more points[1].

[1]: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-
perspective-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/technical-perspective-
apple-iphone-case)

~~~
mirimir
Yes, the precedent is the key thing here.

Let's say that Apple crafted an update that does what the FBI wants. That in
itself wouldn't put other iPhones at risk, as long as a signed copy of that
malicious update didn't leave Apple's custody. The FBI hasn't even asked for
that. They say that Apple could do all the work in house. Furthermore, it's
unlikely that this malicious update would work on newer iPhones.

But the precedent would be established.

------
bleachedsleet
Anybody remember this?
[http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html](http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html)

------
cbeach
"No computer will ever need more than 640K memory" \- Bill Gates 1981

"There is no future in the Internet." \- Bill Gates 1988

------
marak830
Wow. Just wow. I keep thinking there is some huge cavet missing from the
story, but if there isnt, that is massivly disconnected from reality.

Call and message info, okay maybe, but full access? There is no way you can
say thats fine.

I have said it in an earlier comment and ill say it again, i think they are
inly doing this, on this case, to make a precedent, and only on this case, as
few people will want it to be on record, that they are 'siding' with
terrorists.

Imho, its bullshit, all the way through.

------
abpavel
Coming from a man who created aptly named "Windows", where FBI never needs to
ask for access.

------
studentrob
Gates does some great things but he's not thinking far enough into the future
here.

If our law enforcement cannot understand that terrorists will simply switch to
use another encryption tool, then we have a much bigger problem than unlocking
a single iPhone. Our security force does not know how to keep us safe. I'd
rather they figure that out sooner than later.

------
mathetic
Bill Gates led a company that shipped products with poor security for decades
just to maintain their first mover advantage. He actively and deliberately
took part in abusing the fact that security is not the first thing assessed in
a product.

He might be a brilliant man, but he clearly doesn't have the vision when it
comes to security and privacy.

------
4684499
No surprises, considering his attitude to Bitcoin.

------
ousta
Is anyone doubting apple unlocked the iPhone? I don't understand B Gates
stance. of course they did unlock and give it to the police. of course they
will never say it in a PR and we all know why. Is anyone doubting that we are
now living in a world where EVERY one of us is a potential suspect being
processed in a set of crappy ML algorithms and stats where our faces,
fingersprints, RFID cards are being captured at every instant of our lives?
and don't worry IOT is coming. Alexa is already the premise of HAL except that
the AI that controls the world will never happen. Much worse will happen.
People that do not care about mankind or freedom will listen to our every
moves, every instant of our lives.

