Why Do People Support Apple / Whoever NOT Unlocking Phones?

[Sir Topham Hatt]

Just read this article: https://www.neowin.net/news/apple-bolsters-privacy-in-ios-11-with-touch-id-kill-switch

 

I've read things like this before and how much of an uproar there was when the government wanted Apple (or whoever) to break into a phone to get the data from it.

 

My question is, why is there such a problem?

 

I understand, from a privacy point of view - no no no.  It's not right at all.

 

Surely the FBI thinks there could be evidence on the phone?  They're probably not bothered about much else but if your spouse/children/family were murdered, and the person was walking free because the Apple didn't unlock the phone, you'd be fairly angry right?

 

I suppose it depends on the reason why they want it unlocked.

Just wondering peoples views on it.

[adrynalyne]

8 hours ago, Sir Topham Hatt said:

Just read this article: https://www.neowin.net/news/apple-bolsters-privacy-in-ios-11-with-touch-id-kill-switch

 

I've read things like this before and how much of an uproar there was when the government wanted Apple (or whoever) to break into a phone to get the data from it.

 

My question is, why is there such a problem?

 

I understand, from a privacy point of view - no no no.  It's not right at all.

 

Surely the FBI thinks there could be evidence on the phone?  They're probably not bothered about much else but if your spouse/children/family were murdered, and the person was walking free because the Apple didn't unlock the phone, you'd be fairly angry right?

 

I suppose it depends on the reason why they want it unlocked.

Just wondering peoples views on it.

Murder was around before smart phones. I refuse to believe that it is the only source of evidence. Anyway, it’s a slippery slope. I can’t be ok with allowing unlocking and still value my privacy. I have to give up one for another. 

[Joe User]

These new measures protect from unwarranted searches.

 

If a warrant is issued and the person still refuses to unlock the phone, they will be jailed for contempt until they unlock it. During that time, law enforcement can gather more evidence to make their case.

 

 

 

 

[+Fahim S. MVC]

The problem is not about the positives when this facility is used for legit purpose. 

 

The problem is more around how how much abuse it could enable.

 

There have been a lot of good ideas that were for good intentions when designed but ended up being a complete train-wreck in reality.

 

An example is this: HTTP was designed to be human readable which great for a protocol. It was also open to massive amount of abuse (man in the middle attacks etc), which wasn't the intent and if people behaved themselves wouldn't be a problem. 

 

I hope this makes sense. 

[Active.]

9 hours ago, Sir Topham Hatt said:

if your spouse/children/family were murdered, and the person was walking free because the Apple didn't unlock the phone, you'd be fairly angry right? 

Very likely so. But that's almost always a bad argument and simply comes down to emotions trumping reason in that moment and largely caring about my specific situation, and not any principles behind or larger, long-term (side-)effects of any action Apple might take. In that moment, you can't really expect relatives of a murder victim to be impartial, well reasoned judges on what should be done.