Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb
I don't know, this lack of response from Apple doesn't really surprise me. Maybe because I'm used to deal with this kind of attitude day in day out at work, after a while it becomes normal and you have to work with it or around it. The whole industry nowadays is pointing fingers and no accountability. I don't think anyone at Apple is really worried. Won't even register as a blip in their bottom line.
|
Hi Marc,
I think you could be right there!
What's ironic is do you remember the Apple-FBI dispute?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2...yption_dispute
Tim Cook at the time issued a statement saying, "The United States
government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step
which threatens the security of our customers."
Even the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights at the time
warned the FBI of the potential for "extremely damaging implications on
human rights" if the FBI were allowed to compel a manufacturer, under
the direction of a court order, to decrypt the contents of a smart phone.
But perhaps Tim Cook's real concern was not with human rights but
that buyers of smatphones might switch to brands manufactured
by companies outside of the United States where the FBI's jurisdiction
may not exist? In other words, was the real concern the bottom line
rather than customer security?
Or are they genuinely concerned about customer security but as an
organisation that has become impossibly large, lack an effective and
timely security reporting mechanism for the average joe?
At a technical level it also says something about the thin veneer of
the software user interface on a smartphone that can create the illusion
to the user that such-and-such a piece of functionality is switched "off"
when in fact if one purposely crafted the software to improperly do so,
that feature remains "on".
Probably standard trade-craft at the NSA, Mossad, SVR, GCHQ, ASD and
the like.