
Apple: U.S. founders would be 'appalled' by DOJ iPhone request - callmevlad
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-idUSKCN0WH2UI
======
dang
Comments moved to
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11293949](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11293949).

------
dcosson
On a technical level I really don't understand something about this situation.
All the discussion I see presupposes that the only option for Apple to comply
with the FBI is to build & sign this new version of iOS, and then give it to
the government, who will distribute it internally to unlock hundreds of phones
held as evidence in local court cases across the country, at which point it
may or may not (but probably will) be stolen.

It seems like there's another possibility, where Apple takes the phone, signs
the compromised version of iOS on an air-gapped computer deep in Cupertino
somewhere, decrypts the phone, sends the decrypted hard drive image to the
FBI, and then erases the signed version of the software. Why would this
process have any higher risk of being compromised than Apple's normal release
process for signing new iOS versions?

I get the reason this case matters at a more fundamental level, the precedent
it sets and whether or not the government can force Apple to spy on its
customers. It just seems like Apple is exaggerating their argument that it's
impossible to build this new iOS version without it being hacked.

------
jmspring
Very odd, nearly all of the comments got deleted. But the post is still there
(accumulating points).

------
matt_wulfeck
The constitution is meant to keep the government on a very short leash and put
that leash in the hands of private citizens -- though I'm getting the feeling
they desire to be the other way around.

