Apple engineers... Will they (snigger) crack under pressure
I can't imagine Apple would fire an employee for refusing. AAMOF the best publicity in the WORLD for them would be if they publicly declined to discipline or fire an employee for refusing. "Apple’s engineers may refuse to write software to break into the phone of one of the San Bernardino shooters if the FBI wins its court battle with the tech giant, according to more than half a dozen current and former employees." Apple employees are already discussing what they will do if ordered to help law enforcement authorities. Some say they may balk at the work, while others may even quit their high-paying jobs rather than undermine the security of the software they have already created, according to more than a half-dozen current and former Apple employees. Among those interviewed were Apple engineers who are involved in the development of mobile products and security, as well as former security engineers and executives. The potential resistance adds a wrinkle to a very public fight between Apple, the world’s most valuable company, and the authorities over access to an iPhone used by one of the attackers in the December mass killing in San Bernardino, Calif. It also speaks directly to arguments Apple has made in legal documents that the government’s demand curbs free speech by asking the company to order people to do things that they consider offensive. “Such conscription is fundamentally offensive to Apple’s core principles and would pose a severe threat to the autonomy of Apple and its engineers,” Apple’s lawyers wrote in the company’s final brief to the Federal District Court for the Central District of California. In full: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/technology/apple-encryption-engineers-if-o... -- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7GQdAAoJEAKK33RTsEsV3mQQAJpT3cdXDQZDE9Mla+C4yL71 ZepV3D+7f51AVbGgtZu/1+NkTqbRZvrtq9IjFyZdWH4FTM7xUbJmhaHw4048gSwu VupTP0TvQTADLzsEdabsCJSPk3yfZfMqOXeNxhORtuDI6xOLIbeKIx1iMiFvNjnl ETd5NDImtk99A/P7EddPqFEfwy2FwLv6Y6JydXhTyo/UFzzSIjbbx0TDLNvVLma6 3/QNPPF5d3ITVKmmz5kCtrNcVUmqVc7ZwDGdtyC/W8l1HWnG3swjeB+TNJNUdalp 9KPCpWs3ioV2ExhxjxWXuZFECsIzwSPa4yYaNsIYKwbMzQaJasSn+nz65ltEXiRf uPJ9f91DFhmZbhzA3ofqhp4YKUHUWhXhg7GzvU7NdqFcTi2N3EEToKa4f5bA9I3w gVvEAITNJ3YiCHm3MuwiceXNyxNCfeUNBl3c2WiPStmiUHtYNttvUWF66kLsSqwu U2QRJRMZ6+zhheFNgdIWWbgM78YVRPb79plSI44DDAzqORArz7HysA3UJyNQz3Ux wSldYb8VrXBqplMz0vFWgSAfeXUHWGA5jXHfm4sXuKOs54mqDmxolZl5xNuJHqxa vCb+81oyd3OWYO5WxYu7iQ+5YG6DpWa8YnF1ULHx7md2BGRMqZURyCJ4GkC6tl7q 4XUOORuyLRNRFwWeQaHX =zySL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 03:35 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org <mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org <mailto:dan@geer.org> wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.
That /could/ be true. But why should we believe that they wouldn't have enlisted the cooperation of Microsoft prior to the dates on the Snowden leaks? The NSA has been cooperating with companies since the 1970's (and got in a lot of trouble about it). Why would they ignore a company that has 90%+ of the desktop market worldwide? Possible but unlikely IMHO. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7GcUAAoJEAKK33RTsEsVVZIQAKly2eCxgmAHgkyhz1/patK9 IapaxW1dMJk9BJ+pxB9x4IQIEIN29tegapgyWT1FKU9hGhBG2ByWWKLS4GlqAy3n Xhsd+zJIdxP+jilDYZ/np6IyzeOXi9iab7uu6UmNw0nCoFrJnu0t8edDPvGNuDc7 SIrSK8ZQjR66yom2tiZj+AaOzfLcJQVPijNajoidov47+GyPqmXtYU2wr+wgLS0H xCCz8eyK/TAPa+vJjiAXSAW2I1FtRVoRZ+hkRdp/U7F/lkgsu+IKG7K5dZjUYNtB 8Ga26au/TXHJT9wowdpGDEkcXxj2MapJKG3hjMfr0fx0te+TjntAfohwJWxmXAzn giGnIV1RyTp3pGdMCJksQmg4p3xDbULKYUjwe3jaHMOtrszMKhMThb0i3hz5+5Q9 tKkLJlyTbP+ivwJ4t/ZyPhDNqyoKjx7y6926YPAN7kAGO5tjDupgEtKiu6X2u6s6 jyBBEfRC+0T2Qo9kBFjqPl/RjQRkcZoupZ4/ja2mVEXPnSTqdPqoY4IngMUIC5ey dIRX52XReaZkT039zpSx7ZR2ZW7ELp3r8I+TqPvpOIrWinnW4eSQ1jO6kfwxaPq2 ch8hhCw6VnNyapSbpgDkb4vCpEHxEsy3XdOg4jf2Y/RSsjFqHH+/F3yshBF/ITBv BFBPXl/5NkqUzh0gMTEr =L+Pi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 03:35 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org <mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org <mailto:dan@geer.org> wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.
That /could/ be true. But why should we believe that they wouldn't have enlisted the cooperation of Microsoft prior to the dates on the Snowden leaks? The NSA has been cooperating with companies since the 1970's (and got in a lot of trouble about it). Why would they ignore a company that has 90%+ of the desktop market worldwide? Possible but unlikely IMHO.
Just Occam's Razor. Why bother getting cooperation when the software is not secure to begin with? There are too many ways to gain access to Windows that aren't vulnerable to leaks. And we know for sure this is true and has been for a long time; just look at the thousands of exploit kits out there, most of which have been made by people without much in the way of resources or experience. If that's what the script kiddies can do, imagine what an agency with a $50B budget can do.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 03/18/2016 04:18 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org <mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 03:35 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org <mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>
<mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org <mailto:anthony@cajuntechie.org>>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org <mailto:dan@geer.org> <mailto:dan@geer.org
<mailto:dan@geer.org>> wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.
That /could/ be true. But why should we believe that they wouldn't have enlisted the cooperation of Microsoft prior to the dates on the Snowden leaks? The NSA has been cooperating with companies since the 1970's (and got in a lot of trouble about it). Why would they ignore a company that has 90%+ of the desktop market worldwide? Possible but unlikely IMHO.
Just Occam's Razor. Why bother getting cooperation when the software is not secure to begin with? There are too many ways to gain access to Windows that aren't vulnerable to leaks. And we know for sure this is true and has been for a long time; just look at the thousands of exploit kits out there, most of which have been made by people without much in the way of resources or experience. If that's what the script kiddies can do, imagine what an agency with a $50B budget can do.
You bring up good points. It not only saves money but also allows them to hide their true capabilities. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW7HMIAAoJEAKK33RTsEsVD9wQAJzd8z5s7/qrlaR9S9l+e7Yo 8w6drsQvpn4XaR9kzCAz7i1xl+MEzCdqbaIKFNw0Kf5JoAeqRhJ6/pgfMjs6SS9L 1zolofmybjezMmh5d6USvExsDZivvikt6BtsO1o6x33FsMczZrBSfQ1zdA2qsvQY ch/Ms0jZt92iXsefvaxHMZEuGLvZViiB5v1mgU0eBc+GEKiFN469wunPmOXuihWi ngkKZCIJHWd+T/Qtcl8DW9mrNlICs9qmIcTn4mMvl6aJWIj7UenK8Rg33M0/Lv2+ ccyGanXt9kZbsz77PKrZGDcRQ0N0c+37fZaysmY6s9ywwZKKpj1L2BQO40QA4yTC LbUl9hrhu19TE4LZglemlfQXHdZgQYFsz5c6hriyK36oJBi01iEXB1vo30yKIx98 /es0j0xRGCBgbHmQWi+86y4QHhgp+FiRiy9UBv4o5kwV1mPGnZyh7dvX2+i0Eg2a Zr2xPIUBWou+7aL0xv2b+HoiwMzBlNSkyXQ+HxfNqXIKHXq03Liwkel0uiEl7NHg AKhYFm5edtKPlRmzwIBavAQRiVrmilBRT3XBcYfz1Fu4SlLf08SUs5qWAycIOVGN fMDBlXEssQz7xGYK++zw+gi7ejTOdN9/UOzHnYyvP/WO4IMww8pQxxfWH7Qfjl9p bzmWceCXS5QT6UDGujs0 =BmuW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:35:11PM -0700, Sean Lynch wrote:
Or, just playing devils' advocate, perhaps we haven't seen any Snowdens from Microsoft because there's nothing to be leaked? Perhaps, instead of demanding cooperation from vendors and risking getting caught, the government focuses on building the capability to exploit bugs and opsec failures on the part of their targets.
I doubt this. m$ named their signing keys NSAKEY (look it up on wikipedia). Have there been requests m$ to unlock phone/computer? What if m$ gave to the NSA update signing certificate? Heard rumors that the majority of m$ developers, developers!!! see very small fraction of the source, so likely the potential backdoors are kept very well. As an aside, vaguely remember that someone leaked something of little importance (likely screenshots or prerelease). They used _hotmail_ to send the stuff to journos and as expected got caught.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:25:01 -0500 Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft.
Is this message for real? Trolling? Or what.
On 3/18/16, Anthony Papillion <anthony@cajuntechie.org> wrote:
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
[American] entities have been infiltrated by moles loyal to government[s] (and other entities). You may read that the "Snowden" above is not some expose misdeed or vulnerability or code / doc dump to the people for their benefit (though that can exist too). But private dumps back to their masters, and actions on their behest. These lists have linked to documented cases of such interplay such that it should be obvious possibility. Human tactics since prehistoric times.
Dnia piątek, 18 marca 2016 15:25:01 Anthony Papillion pisze:
On 03/18/2016 01:02 PM, dan@geer.org wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
That's not a given. Everyone believes that Windows has backdoors and spying components in it but we've not seen a single Snowden from Microsoft. Why would we from Apple, an even more secretive company than Microsoft?
Caspar Bowden. Not a "technical" Snowden, but a whistleblower (that has gone ignored, by most) nonetheless. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On 3/18/16, dan@geer.org <dan@geer.org> wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
Snowden disclosed in service of Liberty, Apple Insider kleptography will service only Filthy Lucre... make no mistake, the NSA gets their keys. the FBI is the one out in the cold here! best regards,
At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
--dan
Marc Zwillinger, top tech lawyer for Apple in several cases, is an ex-DoJ top tech lawyer. Several of the Apple and amici lawyers are ex-USG, a stepping onto the golden stone -- a la Snowden Inc. -- to higher public service of just-us legally empowered spy-technoids rewards. All sharks are dual-hatted officers of the court, government agents and spies, with privileged access to ex parte, sealed, classified, in camera, judge's chambers, bar associations, commissions, panels, perks-comped and liquid-and-teen-sex fueled retreats and sojourns (flyaways from top law perches to hottie climates), ghost-writing, talking-heads, media advisors, why, momma mia, jumping the sharks is the lawful spying profession's motto. Engineers are not only dual-hatted, but verily Methusalaic with cascading, fast-changing head gear to fit the opportunities to engineer the fuck out of the public with godawful PR-slathered technology, science, math, human experiments, climate trashing, harmful environmental remediation, and, ah ha, literally grandmotherfucking encryption and cybersecurity not worth shit. Pardon our don't give a fuck for Job's protege >1% Tim Cook is so cocksure mouthing in chorus with his duplicitously greedy sharks, venal managerial engineers and advertising geniuses are glossing "on behalf of the public's right to privacy" (except from predatory USG, Apple and amici conspiring to keep secrets and sealings from the iYokels).
On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 10:48:44 -0400 John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
--dan
Marc Zwillinger, top tech lawyer for Apple in several cases, is an ex-DoJ top tech lawyer.
Several of the Apple and amici lawyers are ex-USG, a stepping onto the golden stone -- a la Snowden Inc. -- to higher public service of just-us legally empowered spy-technoids rewards.
The 'amicus curiae brief' from lavabit was pretty unimpressive but of course as self-parody it was great. For instance, the legal geniuses who wrote the 'brief' argued that forcing apple to work for their partners, the government, would be 'involuntary servitude' (poor oppressed corporation). At the same time the master doctors cheerfully 'acknowledged' the supreme authority of the americunt konstitution and noted that 'involutary servitude' was perfectly 'legal', 'just' and 'amazing' in quite a few cases, to wit : "the conscription of americans into military service does not violate the 13th ammendment forced jury service is also not a violation preventing sailors who contracted to work from desserting their ship AND forced roadwork are not a violations of the 13th ammendment" https://cryptome.org/2016/03/usg-apple-102-105.pdf It seems clear that with this kind of 'freedom' 'fighters' freedom needs no enemies.
At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
--dan
We are players in this drama, not observers. If you think someone at Apple should leak sensitive documents in the public interest, why don't you drive over to Cupertino and encourage your contacts there to leak? Evil men take power when good men do nothing. Which are you? jmp
On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 06:31:30PM -0400, J.M. Porup wrote:
At 02:02 PM 3/18/2016, you wrote:
Apple will have its Snowden.
--dan
We are players in this drama, not observers.
If you think someone at Apple should leak sensitive documents in the public interest, why don't you drive over to Cupertino and encourage your contacts there to leak?
Evil men take power when good men do nothing.
Which are you?
Yes indeed, all the world's a security theatre stage. What part are you playing? How many of your fellow actors are collecting paychecks both from Apple, and from foreign and domestic government services? The only part here that's surprising is the blatant public admission by the FBI that they can't afford to pay the market rates for apple insiders. Or was that an intentional leak by the FBI's Snowden, who, unlike Snowden, seems to know how to stay hidden and cause a lot more damage. I also find it hard to believe that Apple's employees would be so willing to sacrifice themselves to save the user's private keys. I find it more likely the cost-benefit calculation determined that locking out unauthorized apple cloners exceeds the cost of litigation, and the marketing and PR side-show was a brand-building bonus of a lifetime. The FBI just got the short end of the stick, and is now getting an education of why it's a bad idea to try to bully a smarter bully with a bigger bankroll. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/apples-ad-budget-hits-1-billion/ https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/fbi-budget-request-for-fiscal-year-2016
On 3/19/16, John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
Marc Zwillinger, top tech lawyer for Apple in several cases, is an ex-DoJ top tech lawyer.
Several of the Apple and amici lawyers are ex-USG, a stepping onto
All sharks are dual-hatted officers
http://fortune.com/2016/03/18/apple-hires-corporate-security-chief/ Apple just hired Stathakopoulos (Amazon, Microsoft) as EVP of internal corporate infosec. If these seemingly principled battles grow, expect corps to be going in deep on candidates with their own SSBI-like anal probes.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:26:52 -0400 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
If these seemingly principled battles grow, expect corps to be going in deep on candidates with their own SSBI-like anal probes.
They already have what amounts to an internal counter-intelligence unit that occasionally runs mole hunts looking for employees that leak information on upcoming products or projects to the news media. I'm kind of surprised they're not doing this already. - -- The Doctor [412/724/301/703/415] [ZS] PGP: 0x807B17C1 / 7960 1CDC 85C9 0B63 8D9F DD89 3BD8 FF2B 807B 17C1 WWW: https://drwho.virtadpt.net/ "What number are we thinkin' of?" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW8ECtAAoJED1np1pUQ8Rk4OkP/RjKKt48ZSZR5ey4E3SBZERK uohmlauwFczF2tqGKeAbbLP2saKk2VIQ3r9d6K4b7kuk0ki0H/31wFjkHOwcvj7d 8LsSPD7FLJj6BPSO6hU6CVYc0V+cct6gdLsN2SaA6Iz2ySyPsUiEVzXfMkmQTqYJ 2R7il0x1Qi5+fsHIXZVJ/0/hK7FTV5/NiZgVy4jHtkUdju4vqWSOdAvjXcqmmeuv zc+gJB2zw2OhP4cTyNiVNW6CAFRoWCK5bryxEfhWea+R5OkdYi+fqV+jllrdpF40 Tt/yYpQv5QSd5CsPiFEma9gQwUgv/E12f+pWGVdPvggSbubtYIDbm8VhW/+xdvKz adkWcuFcITGoq5vNtVLqQKLNTqTLPviAavfLqJIHDY1o18g7qeCfNooD3HjL/04E nR4LPbz/U4AUOcvcJdAd3U1oN967QJGC5pD7Iczy2DdwzuJtKslZ2HMqmQWuqLUz YpchDTeVpg66FJobyxrAWGIeUVzGH11fdmIcAj0uwprAe/g0K4ov9wqba/OoioSy IVzEiXHBJsT3PRo+bswvearOpoA7yIrebLVJNcK39Xwdx19sXDk0rSe2Lkfz31dI jDOoAyhOms2Gt4n+B5cZOcoQ0pae5zm3DnzLxrrdOdkS0GPQoh4cAr6NbTBsq+fr qcrNZC+Kv6QMEkl1lB3g =bzqU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 3/21/16, The Doctor <drwho@virtadpt.net> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:26:52 -0400 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
If these seemingly principled battles grow, expect corps to be going in deep on candidates with their own SSBI-like anal probes.
They already have what amounts to an internal counter-intelligence unit that occasionally runs mole hunts looking for employees that leak information on upcoming products or projects to the news media. I'm kind of surprised they're not doing this already.
Maybe before Snowden corps never thought govts would be in heavy conflict with the corp-customer relationship, essentially attacking one of its essential foundations... crypto, (others being features, price, usability, apps, brand, quality, etc). ie: Previously known govt activities were relagated to tax / structure / employment / trade / safety regulation etc which didn't directly impact users. Too bad corps were just starting to recognize advertise and capitilize on the crypto relationship, with market / user awareness results starting to develop. Which is why Apple must win and be given every possible support from everyone in doing so... to reject clipper v2 forever.
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:46:42 -0400 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
Maybe before Snowden corps never thought govts would be in heavy conflict with the corp-customer relationship, essentially attacking one of its essential foundations... crypto,
There isn't any such 'heavy conflict'. And if you look at shitbags like apple, microsoft, google and the like you'll clearly see that 'crypto' is not an 'essential foundation' for them at all. Whereas their relationship to the US government is certainly 'foundational' Furthermore, it's possible for the IT mafia to sabotage security to a great extent with no real consequences. What, evil hackers are going to steal joe six pack's pirated mp3s and porn? That's a serious security threat. Or maybe the terrists will destroy the world by hacking i-turds and hotmail? Such dire threats to 'national security' eh. bottom line : this year's marketing campaign for retarded phones for retarded 'customers' is getting REALLY annoying.
(others being features, price, usability, apps, brand, quality, etc). ie: Previously known govt activities were relagated to tax / structure / employment / trade / safety regulation etc which didn't directly impact users.
Too bad corps were just starting to recognize advertise and capitilize on the crypto relationship, with market / user awareness results starting to develop.
Which is why Apple must win and be given every possible support from everyone in doing so... to reject clipper v2 forever.
It seems unlikely any engineer who quit Apple rather than write software to help the FBI break into the phone would have any trouble at all finding a job in Silicon Valley that would pay them even more money than they're making at Apple. Apple is nowhere near the top of the list in terms of compensation. On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:17 AM Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
I can't imagine Apple would fire an employee for refusing. AAMOF the best publicity in the WORLD for them would be if they publicly declined to discipline or fire an employee for refusing.
"Apple’s engineers may refuse to write software to break into the phone of one of the San Bernardino shooters if the FBI wins its court battle with the tech giant, according to more than half a dozen current and former employees."
Apple employees are already discussing what they will do if ordered to help law enforcement authorities. Some say they may balk at the work, while others may even quit their high-paying jobs rather than undermine the security of the software they have already created, according to more than a half-dozen current and former Apple employees.
Among those interviewed were Apple engineers who are involved in the development of mobile products and security, as well as former security engineers and executives.
The potential resistance adds a wrinkle to a very public fight between Apple, the world’s most valuable company, and the authorities over access to an iPhone used by one of the attackers in the December mass killing in San Bernardino, Calif.
It also speaks directly to arguments Apple has made in legal documents that the government’s demand curbs free speech by asking the company to order people to do things that they consider offensive.
“Such conscription is fundamentally offensive to Apple’s core principles and would pose a severe threat to the autonomy of Apple and its engineers,” Apple’s lawyers wrote in the company’s final brief to the Federal District Court for the Central District of California.
In full:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/technology/apple-encryption-engineers-if-o...
-- RR "Through counter-intelligence it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble-makers ... And neutralize them, neutralize them, neutralize them"
participants (13)
-
Anthony Papillion -
coderman -
dan＠geer.org -
Georgi Guninski -
grarpamp -
J.M. Porup -
John Young -
juan -
Rayzer -
rysiek -
Sean Lynch -
The Doctor -
Troy Benjegerdes