Menu > Articles de la revue de presse : - l'ensemble [tous | francophone] - par mots clé [tous] - par site [tous] - le tagwall [voir] - Top bi-hebdo de la revue de presse [Voir]

---

S'abonner au fil RSS global de la revue de presse

---

Présentation : A judge has ordered that Apple bypass iPhone security in order for the FBI to attempt a brute-force password attack on an iPhone 5c used by one of the San Bernardino killers. Apple is refusing. The order is pretty specific technically. This implies to me that what the FBI is asking for is technically possible, and even that Apple assisted in the wording so that the case could be about the legal issues and not the technical ones. From Apple's statement about its refusal Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case. In today's digital world, the key to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge. The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable. The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers including tens of millions of American citizens from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe. We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them. Congressman Ted Lieu comments. Here's an interesting essay about why Tim Cook and Apple are such champions for encryption and privacy. Today I walked by a television showing CNN. The sound was off, but I saw an aerial scene which I presume was from San Bernardino, and the words Apple privacy vs. national security. If that's the framing, we lose. I would have preferred to see National security vs. FBI access. Slashdot thread.

Les mots clés de la revue de presse pour cet article : apple backdoor iphone
Les videos sur SecuObs pour les mots clés : apple backdoor iphone
Les mots clés pour les articles publiés sur SecuObs : backdoor
Les éléments de la revue Twitter pour les mots clé : apple iphone





Les derniers articles du site "Security Bloggers Network" :

- In An Era Of Decline, News Sites Can t Afford Poor Web Performance
- BeautifulPeople.com experiences data breach 1m affected
- Swedish Air Space Infringed, Aircraft Not Required
- Why cybercriminals attack healthcare more than any other industry
- Setting the Benchmark in the Network Security Forensics Industry
- Spotify denies hack users subjected to weird music beg to differ
- The Dangerous Game of DNS
- Threat Recap Week of April 22nd
- Is your security appliance actually FIPS validated
- Deploying SAST Static Application Security Testing

---

S'abonner au fil RSS global de la revue de presse

---