[robsteve]

I have been reading and listening to the news regarding the FBI's request to Apple to create a software solution to unlock an iPhone. One question I haven't heard asked or answered is why can't the employer, that owned this phone unlock it. Though the question has not been asked, the answer is probably because the employer wasn't using an EMM to manage their employee's phone.

I just checked BlackBerry's BES12 cloud service and it looks like an administrator can reset the password on a managed iPhone or Android Phone.

Unlock your device and clear the password - BES12 Self-Service - latest

Could an argument be made by law enforcement that if you as an employer supply a phone to an employee, you must have the ability comply to a court order to provide information from it? I suppose this LAW already exists for regulated industries such as banks, but if it was expanded to include all businesses of a certain size or larger, suddenly the market for EMM would get much larger.

[Nick Spagnolo]

Any company has the obligation to carry out a court order. There have been many cases where private records have been seized for investigation ie, medical, financial, school. Phone Data should not be exempt. Ever!

Z10

[stevec66]

I can see this going all the way to the Supreme Court, remember Apple has deep pockets. It's in their interest not to create a back door.

Posted via CB10

[robsteve]

I can see this going all the way to the Supreme Court, remember Apple has deep pockets. It's in their interest not to create a back door.

Posted via CB10

The angle I am trying to get to is whether this incident will result in new rules regarding employer owned phones. In this case wasn't the phone owned by municipal government? Shouldn't it have been managed so that they could unlock a phone owned by the municipality and provide the data?

I am in Canada and not familiar with how State and Municipal Governments work, but here the phones are managed, even the iPhones. I can see this being made law in the USA and maybe extened to mid size to large businesses.

[donnation]

Any company has the obligation to carry out a court order. There have been many cases where private records have been seized for investigation ie, medical, financial, school. Phone Data should not be exempt. Ever!

Z10

It's not about just unlocking one phone, how many times does that have to be explained?

[conite]

The catch-22 is that if companies take a hard line, no compromise position on this, then they may ALL be forced to provide back doors directly to the authorities, by law.

My opinion is to try and appear sensible, and you may at least be able to maintain some control over the process.

[early2bed]

Any regulations that impose responsibilities on employers who deploy phones will just encourage them to stop issuing phones and just offer a stipend or something. What you're saying is that an employer should be responsible for potential personal activities (in this case, planning a terrorist attack) that are on a employee's smartphone.

[eddy_berry]

Does BlackBerry have the ability to remotely unlock a device without compromising all BlackBerry devices? This would explain their stance on the subject. I'm sure if BlackBerry was requested to give access to all devices without BlackBerrys involvement (i.e. A backdoor) they wouldn't. Perhaps BlackBerry doesn't realize that Apple decided the best security is to remove the middle man (i.e. themselves).

Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2339

[bakron1]

Just a thought here folks, I wonder if Apple could unlock the device? Have them do the unlock at their facilities and then give it to the authorities without providing any of the software methods on how it was done?

I know I am the side of privacy and said that in one of my post, but I was thinking about this today and just thought I might be a way to please all parties involved?

[code2solutions]

What a opportunity BlackBerry has to speak up and use this as a platform for BlackBerry 10.

Posted via CB10

[LazyEvul]

Just a thought here folks, I wonder if Apple could unlock the device? Have them do the unlock at their facilities and then give it to the authorities without providing any of the software methods on how it was done?

I know I am the side of privacy and said that in one of my post, but I was thinking about this today and just thought I might be a way to please all parties involved?

They can't unlock it. What the FBI is asking for is to defeat certain security mechanisms that would make the password easier to brute-force, but Apple can't outright unlock it.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[donnation]

Hey do whatever as long as its beneficial to Blackberry right? My lord, and people say that Apple buyers are a in a cult.

[MikeX74]

What a opportunity BlackBerry has to speak up and use this as a platform for BlackBerry 10.

Posted via CB10

Didn't Chen already try that?

[kfehling]

Just a thought here folks, I wonder if Apple could unlock the device? Have them do the unlock at their facilities and then give it to the authorities without providing any of the software methods on how it was done?

I know I am the side of privacy and said that in one of my post, but I was thinking about this today and just thought I might be a way to please all parties involved?

I had the same thought Ron. Would seem like a decent way to resolve the issue for the time being.

Kurt

[donnation]

What a opportunity BlackBerry has to speak up and use this as a platform for BlackBerry 10.

Posted via CB10

And what is the opportunity? That if you use a Blackberry we will give the govt. your information if they request it? How on earth is this an opportunity for BB10??

[code2solutions]

And what is the opportunity? That if you use a Blackberry we will give the govt. your information if they request it? How on earth is this an opportunity for BB10??

It brings up the issues of privacy and security to the public. People have a choice. There's more than just Apple and Android.

Posted via CB10

[donnation]

It brings up the issues of privacy and security to the public. People have a choice. There's more than just Apple and Android.

Posted via CB10

Do you understand that BB has said that they would allow the Govt. access if it was requested? How again is this an opportunity for them in regards to Privacy and Security? BB most recently gave in and allowed the Indian government access to peoples phones. So I'm still not sure of the opportunity that you are talking about.

[MikeX74]

It brings up the issues of privacy and security to the public. People have a choice. There's more than just Apple and Android.

Posted via CB10

So you're hoping that BlackBerry decides to try and capitalize on this by reminding people of their stance on security and privacy, and that it'll lead people to abandon iOS and/orAndroid and choose BlackBerry? There are a few problems with that premise.

1. That would require BlackBerry to actually decide to advertise, which they seem either unwilling or unable to do effectively.

2. This situation has had the effect of letting people know that Apple cares about privacy and security, and is willing to go toe to toe with the federal government to protect it. What could BB's message be in the face of that? "Hey everybody! Look at us! We care about that stuff too, you know!"?

3. It would make BB look desperate(or more desperate) by trying to take some sort of advantage of this situation.

[robsteve]

My thread was meant to address phones with civil servants and or private companies, where the company has failed to secure the device so they have access to the data on it. I was not referring to general phones owned by the public.

I am not trying to argue whether Apple should unlock the phone. Just pointing out that none of the media has asked the question why the employer couldn't unlock it. The answer to the question is the phone wasn't on a device management system like BES12 or similar.

BlackBerry's benefit is they can manage all devices on BES12. It is not about selling BlackBerry phones, but the BES services, which probably has a high margin.

The detriment to BlackBerry would be if it is determined that a normal consumer's BlackBerry phone not on a BES could be unlocked by BlackBerry if ordered to do so by the proper legal channels. I think Mr Chen has inferred this in previous discussions about security.



Posted via CB10

[bberry1995]

I think if an employer provided the phone, then they should unlock it. You were given that phone for work purposes and it is their property. If it's my phone and I own it, then no I don't want anyone unlocking it. I find it violating. It's an invasion of privacy. One can find out more about someone on they're cellphone than they could if they entered their home.

Posted via CB10

[dguy123]

Do you understand that BB has said that they would allow the Govt. access if it was requested? How again is this an opportunity for them in regards to Privacy and Security? BB most recently gave in and allowed the Indian government access to peoples phones. So I'm still not sure of the opportunity that you are talking about.

That's NOT what Chen said. He said BlackBerry complies with court orders to the best of its abilities. He later clarified the statement saying BlackBerry could only provide metadata around communications. Who you communicated with and when. They can't provide the contents of messages. And they can't unlock a phone. As someone else mentioned, am employer can unlock a managed phone, but BlackBerry can't.

Posted via CB10

[dguy123]

It's not about just unlocking one phone, how many times does that have to be explained?

Of course it is about unlocking one phone.

If Apple is worried about a back door getting loose, offer to dump the phone's data at Apple. The feds only get the data. Apple could then destroy the phone if they want.
Apple doesn't have to give the feds a back door, just give them the data.

I find it hard to understand how Apple can't look at the request for what it is and offer compliance in a manner acceptable to Apple while helping to protect public safety. I thought they were supposed to be smart. Guess not.

Posted via CB10

[donnation]

That's NOT what Chen said. He said BlackBerry complies with court orders to the best of its abilities. He later clarified the statement saying BlackBerry could only provide metadata around communications. Who you communicated with and when. They can't provide the contents of messages. And they can't unlock a phone. As someone else mentioned, am employer can unlock a managed phone, but BlackBerry can't.

Posted via CB10

Uh but he did. “We reject the notion that tech companies should refuse reasonable, lawful access requests." Problem with that is the ones making the laws are making the requests.

[Old_Mil]

If Blackberry had stuck with BB10 and advertised security and privacy as a platform feature this would have been an opportunity. As things stand today, it is irrelevant.

[MmmHmm]

Of course it is about unlocking one phone.

If Apple is worried about a back door getting loose, offer to dump the phone's data at Apple. The feds only get the data. Apple could then destroy the phone if they want.
Apple doesn't have to give the feds a back door, just give them the data.

I find it hard to understand how Apple can't look at the request for what it is and offer compliance in a manner acceptable to Apple while helping to protect public safety. I thought they were supposed to be smart. Guess not.

Posted via CB10

Apple isn't doing that because the court didn't order Apple to retrieve the data, give the data to the government, and then destroy the phone. The court ordered Apple to load a security weakened version of iOS into the device to allow the government to use a brute force hack on the device. That's what Apple was ordered by the court to do and that is what it presumably plans to appeal.