
Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone for FBI - samstokes
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/02/23/bill-gates-apple-sides-fbi/
======
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 out another way sooner than later.

~~~
venomsnake
Or Apple should not be able to compromise their own devices. As it should have
been from the beginning.

~~~
studentrob
This dialog should move us in that direction. More people are learning how
their phone's security works and Apple will be pressured, hopefully, to live
up to the public's expectation of privacy.

------
dontscale
"While Apple CEO Tim Cook has consistently argued that unlocking one device
would set a dangerous precedent, Gates doesn't believe that it would. He
argues that Apple has access to the information, but that they are declining
to provide access to the information."

This sounds correct to me. Instead of the government being the gatekeeper
(access by way of court orders), Apple is arguing Apple should be. Why? Should
we trust Apple won't abuse their power when their own interests are at stake?

Remember Terry Childs? Do you mean to tell me if Apple had an an ex-employee
with the keys to their kingdom on his/her iPhone, Apple would just write-off
700 billion dollars? They'd crack that phone without thinking twice about it.

------
DavideNL
This is so ignorant, the worst part is "there would have to be rules in place
to limit how they can access that information."

How did those rules work out for telecom/internet traffic data... The
government can now access anyones data, often even without a judge ruling
whether it is necessary.

------
chrononaut
_Gates went on to say that there were benefits to governments having some
access to information, but that there would have to be rules in place to limit
how they can access that information. He says that he hopes people will "have
that debate so that safeguards are built and so people do not opt out -- and
this will be in country by country -- [to say] it is better that the
government does not have access to any information."_

Is this not the same thing that Apple is arguing for? Except they are looking
for the conversation to happen before the requested action?

~~~
studentrob
I don't know, the way he talks is a little confusing. On another site it
quotes him saying,

 _" 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. 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’," Gates stressed._ [1]

I think that means Gates feels this is only a single case situation, and he
does not believe Cook's assertion that Comey is trying to set a precedent.

Unfortunately the full interview is behind the Financial Times paywall.

[1] [http://sputniknews.com/us/20160223/1035197491/bill-gates-
sup...](http://sputniknews.com/us/20160223/1035197491/bill-gates-supports-san-
bernardino-gunman-phone-fbi-unlock.html)

~~~
italicbold
Unfortunately it is completely different, by cutting this ribbon you allow
potentially anyone access to the banks disk drive - this aspect of back doors
has been discussed ad nauseam. Its sad to see someone of such public stature
deceive the uninformed masses with examples like this.

