
Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist - IBM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/technology/apple-encryption-engineers-if-ordered-to-unlock-iphone-might-resist.html
======
kstenerud
Taking this further down the rabbit hole:

Suppose that only about 5 people can do what the FBI wants done. Suppose all 5
refuse, to the point of quitting Apple. Does the FBI now compel them to return
to Apple and write the software or go to jail?

And what if one of those engineers says that he doesn't actually know how to
do it; Apple only thought he could, but he actually can't. Now we get into
territory of proving competency and capability.

~~~
studentrob
They could be fined hundreds of thousands daily for refusing to act. We
recently found out this happened to Yahoo in 2008 [1] via the FISA court.
Apple shareholders wouldn't like that.

I'm pretty sure Tim Cook and his lawyer mean it when they say they will comply
with the law. Apple engineers need not worry so much about quitting their jobs
over this. If I were there I would stick with Tim Cook. Consider,

If Apple loses this case, this becomes a gigantic public debate where we
scramble to enact legislation that removes this power from the government.

If Apple wins this case, and the government pursues anti-encryption laws, this
becomes a gigantic public debate.

If the case is delayed for 2 years and goes to the supreme court, this becomes
a gigantic public debate.

Regardless, since this is in the public sphere, whether-or-not-we-put-back-
doors-in-phones is going to become a gigantic public debate.

The only way it doesn't become a big debate is if Obama comes out and says
he's been informed on the issue and now realizes encryption in our phones is,
on balance, a good thing.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-
lawsu...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-lawsuit-
documents-fine-user-data-refusal)

~~~
gaur
> this becomes a gigantic public debate where we scramble to enact legislation
> that removes this power from the government.

No such thing will happen. The public will forget this ever happened, and
politicians will do nothing to prevent the government from doing this again.

~~~
studentrob
I don't plan to let that happen. Do you?

I'll fight this as long as it's under discussion. Talk to your friends and
family, contact your representatives and let them know you care.

If we as technologists, the only ones who understand the tech side of things,
are silent, then yes this defeatist attitude will win.

We need not be silent.

~~~
gaur
> contact your representatives and let them know you care.

Unless you have a lot of money, your representatives don't care.

It seems like the only way to make progress is to support stronger encryption,
with less of a possibility of engineering backdoors.

~~~
studentrob
You may enjoy This American Life's episode on "Take the Money and Run for
Office" [1]

> Dick Durbin: I think most Americans would be shocked-- not surprised, but
> shocked-- if they knew how much time a United States senator spends raising
> money. And how much time we spend talking about raising money, and thinking
> about raising money, and planning to raise money. And, you know, going off
> on little retreats and conjuring up new ideas on how to raise money. [2]

...

> Barney Frank: If the voters have a position, the votes will kick money's
> rear end any time. I've never met a politician-- I've been in the
> legislative bodies for 40 years now-- who, choosing between a significant
> opinion in his or her district and a number of campaign contributors,
> doesn't go with the district. [2]

The point is, if they are voted out they lose their jobs and income, therefore
they must listen to voters. I'm not saying I support super PACs or anything,
but I find it comforting to know that if we come together on something then we
do have a role in the democratic process that is stronger than money.

[1] [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/461/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/461/take-the-money-and-run-for-office)

[2] [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/461/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/461/transcript)

~~~
wyldfire
So is there a super PAC that supports the agenda of encryption as a right? If
not, should we make one?

~~~
studentrob
We are! Sort of. Not a money-raising PAC, but rather a campaign to educate
people about encryption in ways that are understandable by non-techies. A few
of us plan to make a website and a fun campaign name. If you're interested in
being involved, send me an email at stillastudent on google's email service.

Or make your own campaign. The more, the merrier.

There is also the EFF, and an organization called Fight for the Future which
is currently running a campaign called Save Security. I'm in touch with both
about working together. Tech companies will also lobby for stuff themselves.
I'm not sure whether the likes of Facebook, Google and Apple are coordinating
on this issue yet or not.

My thought is to do this campaign at zero cost and on donated developer time.
I don't plan to register as a 501(c)3 or take donations. I'm hoping Obama
changes his mind and there is no need for a campaign. But, if that doesn't
happen, I hope we can present the facts to non-techies and share some
reasonable arguments techies can use when talking with friends or family, or
when contacting representatives. I've read a lot of good arguments online. I
think it's just a matter of putting them in one referable location, and making
them relatable to non-techies.

------
naaaaak
No matter what happens in this case, to the individual engineers or to Apple,
the problem runs much deeper:

\- Government power and rights > individual power and rights. \- Mass
surveillance of their own people. \- Constitution consistently ignored. \-
Civil liberties viewed as an annoyance. \- Militarized police force. \- Secret
court systems that "OKs" any government action. \- Mainstream media little
more than an arm of government propaganda. \- Whistleblowers treated like
criminals. \- Indefinite detention laws ready to be used for any reason. \-
Can justify any action in the name of "national security". \- Political class
rules all.

We have a word for this type of government but but no one is talking about it
yet. Whatever the outcome to Apple, a government like this will try again and
find other ways to do what they want.

~~~
citizensixteen
>We have a word for this type of government but but no one is talking about it
yet.

What is the word to describe what we now have in the US?

~~~
over
keep-telling-yourself-that-ocracy

------
studentrob
I honestly feel that engineers need not fall on their swords over this. The
decision is up to them, of course. But ultimately, shareholders would expect
_someone_ to comply with the court order should the DOJ win. Note that Yahoo
was threatened with _daily_ fines of $250,000 for failing to comply in a FISA
court case in 2008, and we only just learned this in 2014 [1].

I don't think we would live in a forced back door world for too long. After
another 2, 4, or 8 years, we will eventually realize that giving the
government a back door to the iPhone did not give it a back door to the myriad
of other encrypted communications tools out there. Terrorists will find other
ways to hide their communications.

I really don't want to see Apple lose this case, or any sort of anti-
encryption bill. I also wouldn't want to see someone throw away working at
Apple over it. Apple can maintain its integrity by complying with the law as
it has publicly stated. Engineers can remain true to an employer they respect
knowing said employer did everything they could to resist the government.
There aren't many great employers out there like this. Don't take it for
granted.

That's just my 2c.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-
lawsu...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-lawsuit-
documents-fine-user-data-refusal)

~~~
saulrh
> I don't think we would live in a forced back door world for too long. After
> another 2, 4, or 8 years, we will eventually realize that giving the
> government a back door to the iPhone did not give it a back door to the
> myriad of other encrypted communications tools out there. Terrorists will
> find other ways to hide their communications.

I'm going to disagree with you here. Didn't we think, back in 2001, that we'd
only have to live with pat-downs on every plane flight for so long? That the
government would eventually realize that terrorists couldn't hijack planes
once passengers knew that the proper response was to storm the cockpit rather
than waiting for the usual ransom demand to be acquiesced to? That the
terrorists would find other ways to cause terror?

If the US Government gets what it wants with this case they will use it as a
wedge to _permanently_ deny us any semblance of electronic privacy. You will
get to choose between using paper and having some random police officer [1]
decide that it's time for you to go down and he's absolutely sure he can find
something you've done wrong [2].

This move is one of the last things standing in the way of that future.
Apple's engineers are threatening to destroy one of the most successful,
profitable organized entities in human history in protest. A sort of
technological mutually assured destruction. I hope their threat works, and
that they don't have to follow through on it, and that if they do, their
statement is understood.

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
watch/wp/2016/03/10/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
watch/wp/2016/03/10/surprise-nsa-data-will-soon-routinely-be-used-for-
domestic-policing-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-terrorism/) [2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction)

~~~
lojack
How exactly are they supposed to permanently remove all semblance of privacy?
Short of infiltrating popular open source projects in plain view and proving
the (potentially) unprovable, I don't see how this is possible.

~~~
saulrh
Like this: [http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-
lin...](http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-link-blocks-
open-source-router-firmware-to-comply-with-new-fcc-rule/)

If they can't quite do that, then they bring back the whole "export-grade
cryptography" thing, except they call it "terrorist-grade cryptography" this
time around. Then they start monitoring every crypto-capable open-source
project's responsible disclosure system. When they see a vulnerability good
enough to subvert that open-source project, they shut down that project before
the bug can be fixed. And then they suppress all knowledge of the bug.

Or they infiltrate popular open-source projects in plain view. Wouldn't be
hard at all to get that one bug they need in some peripherally relevant
subsystem that nevertheless breaks the entire thing.

~~~
Bluestrike2
You're assuming that the government is hyper-competent. I'm not so sure. There
are an awful lot of cooks in that kitchen, so to speak. Eventually, it'd leak
that they're purposely sabotaging open-source projects. Not that that
possibility might stop them from trying, but it'd certainly hamper recruiting
efforts considering the people best able to do the sabotage are the ones
likely to be contributing to the projects in the first place. And even if they
can start forcing tech companies to take actions that hamper their own
security, the best cooperation they can hope for would be a grudging one at
best. It'd be like getting involved in a land war in Asia.

Look at the fight against child pornography. Tech companies dedicate a lot of
resources to fighting child pornography and working with the FBI to help
prosecute offenders and NCMEC to help identify the children being exploited.
Even with the active and enthusiastic support of the tech community, it's an
uphill battle. How much more difficult would that fight be without that
support?

Point being, if governments can't make child pornography--something _everyone_
is against--go away, how likely is it that they'll be able to make a dent
against encryption?

~~~
tajen
"Child pornography". Any pornographic depiction of a person deemed 17 years
old is child pornography. It needs not be a photo, it could be a drawing. If
the origin of the picture is unknown, I assume any picture of a young-looking
25 years old person could be assumed child pornography during an
investigation. As horrible as actual unconsented pornography is, which I
frankly condemn, I still take it with a grain of salt when I'm told "This CEO
has child pornography on his computer".

------
cpt1138
Back in the days of the PalmV I was aghast at the terrible "technique" they
used to store the user password to unlock the device. I was young and very
stupid, but I pushed through proper, for that time, handling of the password.

With a court order, LE asked to unlock a device, and I was able to do it, did
it and they sent me a letter of thanks which I still might have somewhere. I
remember being happy to help, it was a drug case, drugs are bad mmmmkay.

In thinking about it I'm embarrassed at my younger self, but also cognizant
that anyone familiar with the art could break it. It was a terrible,
reversible scheme. After I pushed through the change to store the password I
was confident that it could not be reversed and that it was "safe" and that I
could no longer break it.

If they had suggested removing the other safeguards e.g. allowing any number
of tries, etc. That would be this Apple situation and I really hope my younger
self would have had the sense to plead "ignorance," refuse or whatever because
my principles have not changed that much, and I am 100% on Apple's side on
this issue.

------
moioci
Interesting parallel with Lavabit pointed out at the end of the article. Would
the DOJ be willing to risk shutting down the biggest and most profitable
corporation on earth over this?

~~~
orik
I believe when the government twisted Yahoo's hand and they put up a fight,
Yahoo was given a fine that increased exponentially every day they didn't
comply.

Yahoo would have owed the US gov. a sum equivalent to the GDP by the end of a
month.

~~~
giancarlostoro
If the engineers got fired or quit their jobs what could be done then I
wonder?

~~~
kabdib
Apple HR to security engineer: "You're fired! The color of your hair is all
wrong!" (Yes, you can do this in California)

Security engineer: "Meep?"

HR: "That's right. Oh, and here, since you were such a great employee (up
until we noticed your hair, anyway), have this _extremely generous dollar
amount_ severance package. Maybe if your hair is a different color someday
we'll hire you back."

:

Apple to FBI: "We have no one with the expertise to work on this. Golly, sorry
about that."

Is the FBI then going to make a grab for source code, signing keys, and
_conscript_ people to do the work?

~~~
plorkyeran
> Is the FBI then going to make a grab for source code, signing keys, and
> conscript people to do the work?

I think it's become clear that they'd at least _try_.

~~~
hkmurakami
Interesting. A _draft_ targeting software engineers to forcibly enlist them in
the government's "war on encryption".

What kind of dystopia are we living in again?

~~~
frandroid
Not a draft. As we've seen in Snowden, there are tons of engineers who support
the security state and will volunteer to serve.

------
hysan
Question, does Apple employ any engineers that are not US citizens? Or are
telecommute workers living in other countries? If so and they were one of the
key engineers, what would happen if they refused? What type of international
laws would come into play here?

~~~
dangero
The answer is yes on all counts. Apple has engineers in many different
countries.

To take your question in a completely different way, China could compel their
Apple manufacturing staff to install a back-doored chip into Apple devices on
the production line. Seems reasonable if the US government is asking for a
software back door into all phones.

~~~
hysan
> China could compel their Apple manufacturing staff to install a back-doored
> chip into Apple devices on the production line. Seems reasonable if the US
> government is asking for a software back door into all phones.

Wouldn't that be opening a whole different can of international worms? In this
hypothetical,

\- Is China doing this with or without Apple's knowledge?

\- If not, then it's a very very different situation than the US. I wouldn't
equate them at all in such a case.

\- If so, then Apple presumably would openly fight this and could even move
all of their production outside of China as an extreme last resort. Against
the US government, they don't have such a last resort situation since the
company is based in the US. And unless every essential employee is a non-US
citizen, then Apple has no such last resort. Hence why I am asking my original
question of what international laws come into play here?

~~~
Sacho
> \- Is China doing this with or without Apple's knowledge?

In this hypothetical, sure. The Chinese govt orders Apple to install a
backdoor chip on the production line.

> \- If so, then Apple presumably would openly fight this and could even move
> all of their production outside of China as an extreme last resort.

Moving their production doesn't seem to be more or less difficult than moving
their corporate HQ.

~~~
hysan
Production lines can be moved to other factories at great cost, but the labor
is replaceable. Convincing your entire US living (mostly citizens) engineering
staff to live/work outside the US would be much harder. You can have them
telecommute but there is no way that the company would run anywhere near as
well as it did prior.

Unless there is something in US law that says you can reincorporate outside
the US, keep an office in the US, and yet somehow be excluded from US
jurisdiction. Cause from what I understand, if you have an office in some
country, you are bound to those laws to some degree.

------
joshka
Even putting the engineers in the position to have to make a choice to resist
means that you damage their career prospects whichever way they choose. To be
known as 'that guy' who {supported a corrupt government/supported terrorism}
polarizes future job choices. There's no real upside. As someone asked to do
this, I'd be asking for all future earnings up front from the FBI, so the
economic worth of this is really 8 or 9 figures.

~~~
hoipaloi
If you are one of the very few encryption engineers at apple that can do this,
you are already one of their highest paid employees, and also one of the most
sought after in the entire realm of tech. Quitting over this is likely to
drive your value up even higher.

The FBI when it compels people to do things, pays nothing to have them do it.
That's the power of the law.

~~~
dagw
_The FBI when it compels people to do things, pays nothing to have them do
it._

I'm pretty sure the FBI/Government has stated they will compensate Apple/any
external consultants for their time at their usual rate.

------
staunch
It may be time for that hippocratic oath for engineers idea to become a
reality. I'd take it and live by it.

~~~
evan_
The ACM has a code of ethics that I like a lot:

[http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics/](http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-
ethics/)

Nothing is stopping you from just affirming yourself to live by them without
paying the dues, if you want.

~~~
pjscott
Alternately you can affirm the "never compromise cryptography" code of ethics,
which I just made up and which is exactly what the name says.

------
yarou
This is very much a case of civil disobedience. Non-violent struggle is a
surprisingly effective tactic.

As Gandhi states:

>You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you
will never imprison my mind.

~~~
stcredzero
_> You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but
you will never imprison my mind._

He said that in the 20th century. Imprisoning the mind is the province of the
21st century. Both governments and pseudo-"activists" now seek to do this by
leveraging the Internet.

~~~
pdkl95
All it will take to "imprison the mind" is convincing enough people to use a
system that gives positive reinforcement when your _friends_ act "correctly".
Normal social behavior will do the rest. China (with Tencent) is already
trying this, and Facebook has at least explored this area[2].

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI)

[2] [https://consumerist.com/2015/08/05/facebook-patent-would-
all...](https://consumerist.com/2015/08/05/facebook-patent-would-allow-
lenders-to-determine-creditworthiness-by-looking-at-your-friends/)

------
rbobby
Meh. The FBI has already suggested that it might request the code signing
certificate and the full source tree. With those in hand, I'd expect the NSA
programmers could get this done in a few months.

~~~
Zigurd
> _With those in hand, I 'd expect the NSA programmers could get this done in
> a few months._

The NSA increasingly is not a room full of mathematicians, but an IT
outsourcing customer. But in neither case would they be very competent at
creating a variant of iOS that doesn't touch flash memory and enables brute-
forcing the PIN.

------
chernevik
This case is bad ground for arguments against backdoors.

The government doesn't want a backdoor. They want Apple to remove barriers
slowing and limiting the number of guesses at the key. If the key were longer,
those barriers wouldn't be needed. So this isn't about strong encryption,
without backdoors. It's about some sort of right to short, memorizable keys,
and technical barriers protecting them.

Now maybe we have such rights. (I don't think so, I do think we have a right
to strong encryption and strong keys.) But that's a very different argument
than "backdoors are bad". If Apple's case is "no backdoors", they make that
argument look not like a technical argument but a preference to not comply
with a warrant. Non-technical people could easily get the idea that technical
people say "no backdoors" when they just don't agree with the government's
ability to execute warrants, and that all the technical arguments about real
security are mumbo jumbo to avoid obeying laws they don't care for.

Using strong encryption with phones is a usability issue. If the phone were
somehow protected by a strong key, Apple could easily comply with this order
and the government still could't read the phone. But they haven't figured out
how a user can deploy a strong key in some usable fashion. Well, that's
obviously a challenge to phone data privacy. I expect it is solvable. And it
is much less an issue in contexts like desktops and laptops.

But we have a right to encryption. We don't have a right to usability.
Claiming the two are the same weakens the case to the right we do have.

------
ekianjo
> “It’s an independent culture and a rebellious one,” said Jean-Louis Gassée,
> a venture capitalist who was once an engineering manager at Apple. “If the
> government tries to compel testimony or action from these engineers, good
> luck with that.”

Funny to see Jean-Louis's name out of the blue again. He was the creator of
BeOS back in the days.

~~~
brianpan
He still blogs about Apple at
[http://www.mondaynote.com/](http://www.mondaynote.com/)

------
marricks
I wonder if Apple would finance their legal fees if they resisted, or would
that be considered some sort of encouragement?

It might very well help public appeal if there was a person resisting the
government compared to a large corporation.

Then again, if they get to the point of ordering Apple to break their security
seems like they already lost the case at that point.

~~~
zippergz
> It might very well help public appeal if there was a person resisting the
> government compared to a large corporation.

I was thinking that too, but then I reflected on the anti-Apple opinions I've
seen in this case (mostly from a small subset of my Facebook friends). My fear
is that it would actually do the opposite - it would give a face to the
"spoiled" and "liberal nutjob" Silicon Valley nerds who "want to help
terrorists." I hope I'm wrong...

~~~
jonesb6
For example if the engineer in question was an unattractive male, perhaps also
a minority, someone with weird hobbies etc.

------
superuser2
If Apple continues to resist, the FBI will simply take the source code and
signing keys and hand them over to some contractor to do the work. Is that
better? Apple's source code and signing keys in the FBI's hands?

~~~
adventured
It would be better to push the FBI into that position, yes. Make them steal
that property at gun point, literally. Force them to show up at Apple HQ, with
SWAT teams, threatening to murder innocent, unarmed engineers in the streets.
Make sure every news source available is there to witness and broadcast it
live.

Why force it? To drop all pretext of what this really is, and reveal the US
Government's actions as being that of the fascist monster it has become. After
all, we've got the US military directly, intentionally spying on everything
Americans do electronically. We're probably two or three steps or 'events'
away from our first Caesar attempting to take permanent executive power. It's
going to get a lot worse yet, just look how far they've come in a mere 15
years in their power grab. It's better to just stop pretending, here and now,
regarding what's really happening.

It would be the Tiananmen Square for privacy in America.

~~~
jnbiche
> We're probably two or three steps or 'events' away from our first Caesar
> attempting to take permanent executive power.

Or a single election. Hitler gained initial power democratically, after all.

------
bunkydoo
I'm amazed to think that in only a short number of years the work that has
been done at Apple R&D in the US might have to go off shore because of our own
government...

------
hollander
Guess what happens if the FBI wins this, and Apple is forced to comply, and
actually does decrypt this one phone, and probably later on hundreds or
thousands of other iPhone 5 phones. Guess what: Apple will make the system so
secure that this can never happen again.

This whole discussion has led me to reconsider the much too expensive iPhones,
and my next phone might very well be an iPhone 6 or newer.

~~~
DanBC
If your adversary is a well funded government agency you need to do a lot more
than buy an iPhone.

If you're still alive when "they" want information they'll just
extraordinarily rendition you and torture you. Or they'll implement laws like
UK RIPA which require you to make available the unencrypted version when asked
by a court. Or they'll install covert surveillance equipment.

------
nxzero
It would be funny if a bug was introduced that became known that instead of
being an exploit was a patch to the backdoor.

------
muddi900
What sort of decryption task would even be needed if ? Suppose Apple can
update the phone signed backdoored update, the DOJ order never asked for
decryption, only a way to bruteforce the phone.

------
neugier
How do we know this isn't all fake? That the FBI doesn't already have access
to iPhones, and just wants people to feel safe (from them)?

------
schwarze_pest
Independent of the outcome of this case, maybe it is time for Apple to leave
their current jurisdiction. I heard Island is lovely this time of the year.

------
simonh
Surely the moral responsibility of a manager ordering such work done is just
as great as that of an Engineer carrying it out. So why is the debate entirely
about the Engineers refusing to do the work, and nobody is talking about
managers refusing to give the order?

I'm not saying that anyone should refuse, I think that's a foolish idea and as
has been pointed out the Government has many tools and sanctions available it
can use to compel compliance. I just find the current debate somewhat
blinkered.

~~~
hollander
The manager can easily be replaced by hundreds of others working at Apple. The
engineers not.

------
bicknergseng
I actually just asked this question in another thread 2 days ago. Really
interested in how it would play out from a legal standpoint.

------
spinlock
Id love to see the people behind healthcare.gov tell Apple employees that they
were moving too slow.

------
spectrum1234
Apple's poor org structure is a blessing in this case:

Apple said in court filings last month that it would take from six to 10
engineers up to a month to meet the government’s demands. However, because
Apple is so compartmentalized, the challenge of building what the company
described as “GovtOS” would be substantially complicated if key employees
refused to do the work.

------
throwaway7798
What exactly does Apple need to crack the iPhone? A bunch of signing keys?

------
awinter-py
the EPIC quote comparing backdoorization for a security dev to euthanasia for
a doctor is weirdly confusing; it flips the script on personal freedoms.

~~~
21
It compares it to forcing a doctor to do an euthanasia. If you want to kill
yourself, don't force me to do it, find someone who will willingly do it.

------
mrmondo
and I for one would stand by them for doing so.

------
harryh
Son, go to your room!

But I don't want to go to my room!

Son, go to your room!

Mommy, what would happen if on the way to my room I ran into a pack of wild
dogs in the hallway blocking my path? Would I still have to go to my room?

~~~
dang
We detached this subthread from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11309007](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11309007)
and marked it off-topic.

~~~
harryh
It's off topic to point out that bringing up an extreme hypothetical as a
reason to not do something is pretty bad defense?

Really?

------
intrasight
You all understand, right, that Apple is going to lose this fight. I'm sure
the smart players, including Apple, are already planning for the eventuality.
There is no right to have close source software.

------
freewizard
Dear FBI, why bother Apple? Just hire Chinese or Korean engineers[1] to crack
it! They know more backdoors than Apple does.

[1] [http://blog.trendmicro.com/pwn2own-
day-1-recap/](http://blog.trendmicro.com/pwn2own-day-1-recap/)

------
iamleppert
I bet none of these engineers have spent a single night in jail. All it would
take would be for a judge to send a single one to jail for the weekend, and
they'd be happy to quickly bang out whatever the government wanted as soon as
possible on Monday morning.

The sentiment is nice, but I doubt the government is worried in the slightest.
The government is all powerful and can be whatever it wants, lest we forget.

~~~
jacquesm
How could they be ordered to do anything if they are no longer employed by
Apple? Resigning is a pretty powerful statement, being _compelled_ to work for
an employer you no longer want to work for is orders of magnitude worse than
anything else suggested in this whole sordid saga to date.

Compelling a company to produce a product is bad enough, let's not add
treating people like chattel on top of it.

~~~
tacos
A Judge can issue an Order saying whatever they hell he or she wants.

A Judge can order you to leave work and sit on a Federal Grand Jury for 36
months.

A Judge can order an innocent bystander to testify or sit in jail until he
agrees to do so.

Employment status has nothing to do with anything. Just because you quit the
police department doesn't mean you don't have to cooperate with a federal
investigation or anything that a Judge orders you to do during that trial,
from the grand jury phase up to and through sentencing.

I so often agree with the general sentiment of HN posters but the lack of
understanding around basic civics is disheartening.

------
tacos
"Apple Encryption Engineers, If Ordered to Unlock iPhone, Might Resist"

Um... no. Perhaps until they get a whiff of a professional, um, "motivator" in
the guise of an FBI agent or carefully-chosen warden. Some of you guys crack
under the pressure of solving a C++ warning. The guy who upvotes every "Ten
things about being an Introvert" post at HN will last precisely ten seconds
when presented with that reality.

I admire a good hunger strike every now and then but this case has been
mismanaged by both sides. Slippery slopes and domino theories but really --
you're gonna rot in jail versus coughing up a pin code to protect the privacy
of a dead terrorist? This could have been narrowed, should have been narrowed,
and an anonymous post card with four digits on it could end the standoff. And
that's the way it's always been done. Apple seems ignorant of this reality and
they are going to pay a dear price for their position -- even before they
incur the cost of forcing employees into an ethical rat trap.

~~~
tacos
Downvotes aside, looks like the anonymous postcard showed up right on cue:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/technology/apple-fbi-
heari...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/technology/apple-fbi-hearing-
unlock-iphone.html)

Apple shouldn't have been surprised by this. They will however pay a dear
price for the posturing. And they will have wasted valuable public sentiment
when the government tries again, which it will.

