SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Apple closes law enforcement loophole for the iPhone
Apple is about to make it much harder for law enforcement agencies to gain access to information on iPhones.
The company will include a new feature, called USB Restricted Mode, in a future update of its iOS software, which runs on iPhones and iPads.
The feature disables data transfer through the Lightning port one hour after a phone was last locked, preventing popular third-party hacking tools used by law enforcement from accessing the device. The port can still be used for charging.
[...] Reuters and The New York Times first reported that Apple (AAPL) had confirmed the new feature. Vice's Motherboard previously reported that Apple was testing the change.
Law enforcement officers have already been quoted opposing the security upgrade:
"If we go back to the situation where we again don't have access, now we know directly all the evidence we've lost and all the kids we can't put into a position of safety," said Chuck Cohen, who leads an Indiana State Police task force on internet crimes against children. The Indiana State Police said it unlocked 96 iPhones for various cases this year, each time with a warrant, using a $15,000 device it bought in March from a company called Grayshift.
[...] Hillar Moore, the district attorney in Baton Rouge, La., said his office had paid Cellebrite thousands of dollars to unlock iPhones in five cases since 2017, including an investigation into the hazing-related death of a fraternity pledge at Louisiana State University. He said the phones had yielded crucial information, and he was upset that Apple planned to close such a useful investigative avenue. "They are blatantly protecting criminal activity, and only under the guise of privacy for their clients," he said.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15 2018, @01:21AM (1 child)
All forms of security and freedom 'blatantly protect criminals'. Due process protects criminals. Warrant requirements protect criminals. Freedom of speech protects criminals. We should outlaw all forms of security, privacy, and freedom in order to catch those nasty criminals. The problem is, all of those things also protect good people, and protecting good people from governments and criminals is far more important than catching bad guys. It's similar to how our legal system is supposed to be based on the notion that it's better for countless bad guys to go free than for one innocent to be convicted. You know a government is corrupt and authoritarian if it does not hold this principle to be true, regardless of what excuses it uses.
Of course, there's also the problem that many good people are in fact criminals, since many laws are unjust. Edward Snowden is such an example, according to various governments.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Sourcery42 on Friday June 15 2018, @01:39PM
You're already +5, so I guess I'll have to leave it at, well said AC.