[anon(9721108)]

Apple also asked the FBI how they hacked the San Bernardino iPhone but the FBI won't talk.

So basically:

FBI: "Hey, Apple, it's only 1 phone we want to hack. Tell us how."
APPLE: "No, it's not 1 phone. You want to hack all our phones."
FBI: "Nevermind. We got in."
APPLE: "Tell us how. It's only 1 phone, right?"
FBI: "No, it's not 1 phone. Now we can hack all your phones."


I am willing to bet that the FBI simply found the password somewhere and it worked, because yesterday there was the murder investigation in Arkansas and the FBI admitted that they could NOT get into that iPhone, I posted the link in here yesterday.

My other concern is for American jobs. If Apple products are seen as weak or not secure, people will flock to Korean or overseas phones for their security, businesses as well. So I am against the FBI knowing how to hack them.

Also I do not think there would be anything on that San Bernardino iPhone 5C because it was a work phone and the terrorists had already destroyed all their other devices

[donnation]

Can you cite a source for "Blackberry has said they would comply regardless of there was a law or not?"



...that is what Chen said: BB would comply with "lawful access requests...within legal and ethical boundaries." Can you show me a source where BB/Chen has said they will hand over information when a warrant/court order has not been issued?

Ok but I still dont understand your argument. We won't know what Blackberry would do if a situation like this arose because hardly anyone uses them and Apple has much more of a chance of something like this happening to them because of the sheer mass of people that use their devices. But if BB is willing to comply will a "lawful request" and you are stating that Apple would do the same if such a law was mandated then what are you arguing? That Blackberry and Apple have the same policy on privacy? It's not really an argument so I don't really know what you are saying.

[Mr.Willie]

The reason that I feel sad for the iPhone users is that they were so jubilant when Apple refused to help the FBI.

It must give them many sads that the FBI can open their phones regardless if Apple helps or not.

I agree with you. Apple guys were probably fist hitting their chests thinking that they had a secure phone.

Show me the link to that information. Hey listen,there is a reason why Obama and Clinton use Blackberry and you know its not because of their apps.

Not just the FBI either.

Back to square one for apple.

TMO  Z10,STL100-3/10.3.2.2789

A precedent of obtaining a warrant for a specific device(s) and then going to the manufacturer on a case-by-case basis to ask them to unlock, or a third party if manufacturer doesn't comply? I'm OK with that. The onus is on the manufacturer to make sure the third party can't get in...something at which Apple has miserably failed.

Why is that, because the FBI got into a 5C running iOS 7 ? You do realize that they are on 9.3, right ? Do you also realize that the 5S and newer have a secure enclave ? And the theory behind breaking them involves ion drills and electron microscopes ?

Geeze people. I understand you have a hatred, but think a little bit.

Again for the 500th time will one of you security experts please tell me how my BES Q10 is more secure ?

[raino]

you are stating that Apple would do the same if such a law was mandated then what are you arguing? That Blackberry and Apple have the same policy on privacy?

Yes! That despite all their PR-driven crusading for "privacy rights," Apple's position is really not all that different from BlackBerry's that you and so many others seem to hate.

BTW...what are Apple's policies in China like, any idea?

[BlackGuy]

A lot of nonsense in this thread. Anyway, most people know that Apple has weak security...

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[raino]

Why is that, because the FBI got into a 5C running iOS 7 ?

Uhh...what? That phone was running iOS 9. But don't let facts get in your way.

[donnation]

Yes! That despite all their PR-driven crusading for "privacy rights," Apple's position is really not all that different from BlackBerry's that you and so many others seem to hate.

BTW...what are Apple's policies in China like, any idea?

So then if you are claiming that it's a PR driven crusade for privacy rights then Blackberry's would simply be the same PR driven campaign. If they have the same policy trying to paint one in a bad light over another doesn't make much sense to me.

[raino]

So then if you are claiming that it's a PR driven crusade for privacy rights then Blackberry's would simply be the same PR driven campaign. If they have the same policy trying to paint one in a bad light over another doesn't make much sense to me.

BlackBerry is saying it as it is (for which they are considered the bad guy here on CB, but I digress.) Apple is trying to show they're in the corner of the little guy, while asking Congress to pass more laws to get the access they want.

Now...about China...

[donnation]

BlackBerry is saying it as it is (for which they are considered the bad guy here on CB, but I digress.) Apple is trying to show they're in the corner of the little guy, while asking Congress to pass more laws to get the access they want.

Now...about China...

I don't see them asking for a law to be passed, I see them stating that if one was passed the would comply. Keep the spin going to though, just like the spin of "we only want access to one phone" from the FBI. If you honestly believe that you are either naive or just hating against a company in every way you can think of.

And China, I don't know, but I'm sure you have some great input on it though.

[raino]

I don't see them asking for a law to be passed, I see them stating that if one was passed the would comply.

LOL. And what is BlackBerry saying--that they're going to give LE access outside the laws? Is that what you're still sticking to, when I asked you for a source a few posts ago?

Keep the spin going to though, just like the spin of "we only want access to one phone" from the FBI. If you honestly believe that you are either naive or just hating against a company in every way you can think of.

Wait a minute...I thought y'all were against generalizations? So what's this about the future intent of the FBI you are extrapolating?

And China, I don't know

Oh, are you sure? Or are you either naive or just "standing up" for a company without looking at their global practices?

[donnation]

LOL. And what is BlackBerry saying--that they're going to give LE access outside the laws? Is that what you're still sticking to, when I asked you for a source a few posts ago?



Wait a minute...I thought y'all were against generalizations? So what's this about the future intent of the FBI you are extrapolating?



Oh, are you sure? Or are you either naive or just "standing up" for a company without looking at their global practices?

Wait, you just said that Apple is ASKING congress to create laws to allow access. That just isn't true and yet you just keep glossing over that. I never said Blackberry would give access outside the law. I said they already stated they would give access and you somehow spin that into an argument that their stance was ok but that Apple's was different and bad.

Lol I don't need to be naive to know that the practices of big brother with everything going on in the US as far as profiling and how much information the government wants on everyone. Are you a US citizen or Canadian? Just curious.

And I don't know what the practices are in China. I don't typically follow what the privacy laws are in non free countries but I'll make sure to read up on them and report back to you.

[raino]

Wait, you just said that Apple is ASKING congress to create laws to allow access. That just isn't true and yet you just keep glossing over that.

Alrighty, then. What do you make of Bruce Sewell's quoted testimony? Specifically, this part: "The decisions should be made by you and your colleagues as representatives of the people?"

I never said Blackberry would give access outside the law.

Blackberry has said they would comply regardless of there was a law or not

Are you a US citizen or Canadian? Just curious.

US citizen. Did you notice the "protecting American jobs" nationalistic post in this thread? Just curious.

[donnation]

Alrighty, then. What do you make of Bruce Sewell's quoted testimony? Specifically, this part: "The decisions should be made by you and your colleagues as representatives of the people?"







US citizen. Did you notice the "protecting American jobs" nationalistic post in this thread? Just curious.

That not the FBI but elected representatives are the ones that would have to require a law to provide access. It in no way states that they are ASKING them to make laws to allow this. I don't know how you get that from that statement.

[raino]

That not the FBI but elected representatives are the ones that would have to require a law to provide access. It in no way states that they are ASKING them to make laws to allow this. I don't know how you get that from that statement.

But there already is a law that allows the FBI access: it's the one that was interpreted in their favor in the San Bernardino case. So where is Apple leading the horse here?

[donnation]

But there already is a law that allows the FBI access: it's the one that was interpreted in their favor in the San Bernardino case. So where is Apple leading the horse here?

What law and what case in their favor? They dropped the case.

[raino]

What law and what case in their favor? They dropped the case.

Sooo did you really forget that Apple was actually ordered to help the FBI decrypt the phone? That would be very surprising to me; your memory never fails you when it comes to BlackBerry.

[donnation]

Sooo did you really forget that Apple was actually ordered to help the FBI decrypt the phone? That would be very surprising to me; your memory never fails you when it comes to BlackBerry.

Sigh. No I remember. They were ordered to unlock a phone by a judge. They refused because the FBI wanted a back door and not just that one phone unlocked, which there is no law stating that a back door would have to be provided, which Apple refused to do. Now please tell me again how Apple is wrong and how I should look into the privacy practices in a non free country like China. Spin away; I'll keep listening and I guess we will just go on and on. You can praise Blackberry till the death and that's fine. I'm not against them at all I just think the hate on Apple is absolutely ridiculous and petty by people who are still upset that they took away customers from Blackberry. But please continue.

[raino]

Sigh. No I remember. They were ordered to unlock a phone by a judge. They refused because the FBI wanted a back door and not just that one phone unlocked, which there is no law stating that a back door would have to be provided, which Apple refused to do. Now please tell me again how Apple is wrong and how I should look into the privacy practices in a non free country like China. Spin away; I'll keep listening and I guess we will just go on and on. You can praise Blackberry till the death and that's fine. I'm not against them at all I just think the hate on Apple is absolutely ridiculous and petty by people who are still upset that they took away customers from Blackberry. But please continue.

Since you ask so nicely, I'll continue.

My point--which seems to have escaped you--is that Apple has this one PR-driven stance in the US, whereas they sell devices in China after submitting them to government authorities for "security checks." So which Apple is the real Apple? Spin away!

Oh..and can you please link me to the post in this thread where I "praised" BlackBerry for their policy?

[donnation]

Since you ask so nicely, I'll continue.

My point--which seems to have escaped you--is that Apple has this one PR-driven stance in the US, whereas they sell devices in China after submitting them to government authorities for "security checks." So which Apple is the real Apple? Spin away!

Oh..and can you please link me to the post in this thread where I "praised" BlackBerry for their wpolicy?

When China is a free non communist country I'll look into it. They have a stance here because it is a free country where the people aren't completely controlled by the government in every facet of life.

And I never said you praised them for their policy. I just said you praise them. Which maybe was a poor choice of words. I question a lot of what I think are terrible decisions and terrible ways to treat customers by BB. Doesn't mean I hate them. I also don't have some ridiculous blind hate for Apple. I think they make a good product of which I sometimes use while also using a crap ton of BB10 phones and the Priv.

If we really wanted to get into a privacy debate we could go on and on about how Blackberry is marketing their Android phone as private, when that couldn't be farther from the truth. It's allowing Google access to your information plain and simple. It can help protect you from apps gaining access (Well not really protect, but warn you with Dtek) but it somehow magically excludes all Google apps from DTek. But let's not do that because I'm sure you and I will go round and round on that too.

I don't want to really argue with you anymore so if you want to respond one more time please feel free but we will just have to agree to disagree. It's Friday night and time to go out with my lovely wife and in the morning I won't care enough to even continue this. I have enjoyed going back and forth with you but we aren't really going to get anywhere. Have a good night.

[Aman1007]

So a normal Blackberry with no BES is as insecure as Android?
What about Google collecting all our info n data..Will it still be possible even if one uses Blackberry with no Gmail Account sync?
Can Blackberry be hacked as easily as Android?
Are all apps in BB World collect data the same way as apps on Play Store does?

[sorinv]

Most of the apps in BlackBerry World allow permission control by the user. So, if you set permissions correctly, they are unlikely to datamine you.

[Mr.Willie]

Uhh...what? That phone was running iOS 9. But don't let facts get in your way.

Duh source ? (There seams to be a little confusion in the media over this).

It's still a 5C.

Still ignored my question about my Q10.

[raino]

Duh source ? (There seams to be a little confusion in the media over this).

It's still a 5C.

Duh here you go:

FBI Says It Unlocked San Bernardino Gunman?s iPhone Without Help From Apple | KTLA
Judge: Apple must help FBI unlock San Bernardino shooter?s iPhone | Ars Technica
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/te...case.html?_r=0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...cf6_story.html
Apple must unlock the iPhone 5c's encryption... or else

Not seeing much confusion there...

Still ignored my question about my Q10.

Not an expert on BES, sorry.

[bb10adopter111]

Yes, and as soon as judges are appointed, they are no longer accountable to voters (or the elected officials who appointed them), because they have lifetime tenure.

Yes, that's the way it's supposed to work. Their job is to administer the law. If you don't like the laws, then speak to your legislators. Judges. Are still accountable for their conduct. They can be removed if they break the law or violate their oaths or engage in other types of misconduct.

Posted via CB10

[Mr.Willie]

Duh here you go:

FBI Says It Unlocked San Bernardino Gunman?s iPhone Without Help From Apple | KTLA
Judge: Apple must help FBI unlock San Bernardino shooter?s iPhone | Ars Technica
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/te...case.html?_r=0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...cf6_story.html
Apple must unlock the iPhone 5c's encryption... or else

Not seeing much confusion there...



Not an expert on BES, sorry.

Initially there was an article or two that stated 7.xx

I'm an average Joe with a Q10. It's my own, that I bought myself. AT&T. I'm not on BES. When I got rid of my 9810, I was no longer or BIS even.