Apple versus Open Fabs

Troy Benjegerdes hozer at hozed.org
Tue Feb 23 15:19:50 PST 2016


On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:03:04AM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> On 2/19/16, Tamzen Cannoy <tamzen at cannoy.org> wrote:
> > http://www.macrumors.com/2016/02/19/apple-government-changed-apple-id-password/
> 
> "
>     The executives said the company had been in regular discussions
> with the government since early January, and that it proposed four
> different ways to recover the information the government is interested
> in without building a back door.
> 
>     Apple sent engineers to try that method, the executives said
> "
> 
> You don't want your secure hardware provider voluntarily
> "discussing" "proposing" "recovering" "sending" or "trying" anything
> in the "interests" of, or with, your adversary.
> If there was no court order for this... this is very troubling...
> never talk to the <adversary>, only to your client.
> 
> Nor do you want your secure hardware provider to be providing
> you with unverifiable, therefore quite possibly, junk.
> 
> You need open fabs producing open hardware.
> 
> Till then the only proof you have is that some adversaries
> court case failed in its attack or that everyone is still standing.
> Neither of which are sufficiently complete proofs positive.

This whole apple thing reeks of political spectacle. Nothing is
as it seems.. Is this really about that particular phone, or is
there some effort by one faction in the secret world to open 
the door and shed some light on the risks the law enforcement
Clipper Chip 2.0 crowd is going to put on national security?

Is there an FBI insider who carefully crafted the request to the
judge for maximum public political impact? Or was it a judge who
is fed up with one too many secret gag orders they can't discuss?

And what the hell's going on with the city, who happens to own 
the actual hardware. Why **this** phone? It's a perfect test case
to make the system explode from it's own contradictions.

In an election year, no less. Can you say "market volatility?"

The enemy of your enemy is sometimes worth collaborating with..
Do we have some public signals intelligence here from the
non-public folks that they don't like the FBI requesting the
crypto keys to the kingdom either?



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list