“The husband of a victim of the San Bernardino terror attack has backed Apple in its fight over the security of its iPhones,” Charles Riley reports for CNN. “Salihin Kondoker’s wife Anies was shot three times during the attack, but survived. While she recovers, he’s advocating on Apple’s behalf as the company resists a court order directing it to break into the iPhone owned by Syed Farook, one of the San Bernardino shooters.”
“In a letter addressed to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym, Kondoker wrote that he was initially ‘frustrated’ to hear that Apple opposed the court’s order, but came to share the company’s fears after he learned more about its position,” Riley reports. “‘I believe privacy is important and Apple should stay firm in their decision,’ Kondoker wrote. ‘Neither I, nor my wife, want to raise our children in a world where privacy is the tradeoff for security.'”
“In his letter, Kondoker questioned whether any meaningful information is even stored on the device. The iPhone in question was not Farook’s personal smartphone — it was a work phone provided by San Bernardino County, his employer, and therefore an unlikely place to store sensitive data,” Riley reports. “‘Why … would someone store vital contacts related to an attack on a phone they knew the county had access to?’ Kondoker asked. ‘My wife also had an iPhone issued by the County and she did not use it for any personal communication.'”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As we wrote last month: “If the feds ever do get into that iPhone, we hope they enjoy nothing but hundreds of photos of high school cafeteria trays.”
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
SEE ALSO:
Over 40 companies to back Apple vs. U.S. government overreach; beleaguered Samsung still thinking about it – March 3, 2016
Apple posts amicus briefs in support of Apple vs. U.S. government overreach – March 3, 2016
U.S. Defense Secretary says strong encryption essential to national security, not a believer in back doors – March 3, 2016
Apple digs in for long fight against U.S. government overreach: ‘There is no middle ground’ – March 3, 2016
ACLU, other privacy groups urge U.S. judge to support Apple vs. U.S. government in iPhone case – March 2, 2016
Apple scored the knockout punch against FBI in House Judiciary Committee hearing – March 2, 2016
Within an hour of Malaysia Flight 370 disappearing, Apple was working with officials to locate it – March 2, 2016
John McAfee reveals how the FBI can unlock an iPhone in 30 minutes – March 2, 2016
Can the FBI force a company to break into its own products? No, says U.S. Magistrate – March 2, 2016
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Obama administration set to expand sharing of data that N.S.A. intercepts – February 28, 2016
Apple’s fight with U.S. could speed development of devices impervious to government intrusion – February 24, 2016
Petition asks Obama administration to stop demanding Apple create iPhone backdoor – February 19, 2016
Obama administration claims FBI is not asking Apple for a ‘backdoor’ to the iPhone – February 18, 2016
Obama administration wants access to smartphones – December 15, 2015
Obama administration war against Apple just got uglier – July 31, 2015
Obama’s secret attempt to ban cellphone unlocking, while claiming to support it – November 19, 2013
Question for FBI:
Why didn’t they or the police just push his finger on the button?
Dead fingers don’t work.
Don’t ask me how I know that or I’ll have to kill you. 😉
(Brought to you by Carl’s Jr.)
Because what they really want is to control all digital devices – Apple first and foremost.
Bingo
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2016/03/03Amicus-Briefs-in-Support-of-Apple.html#labnol
Did the 5C have a fingerprint scanner?
And if it did you still need the passcode after 48 hours.
While he was still warm at least.
“In a letter addressed to Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym, Kondoker wrote that he was initially ‘frustrated’ to hear that Apple opposed the court’s order, but came to share the company’s fears after he learned more about its position,” Riley reports. “‘I believe privacy is important and Apple should stay firm in their decision,’ Kondoker wrote. ‘Neither I, nor my wife, want to raise our children in a world where privacy is the tradeoff for security.’”
This is a very telling statement. I think that a lot of the people who side with the government on this just don’t know what’s at stake. There are still a lot of people who need to be informed of the facts.
Let me repeat, ‘Neither I, nor my wife, want to raise our children in a world where privacy is the tradeoff for security.’”
Regarding: “There are still a lot of people who need to be informed of the facts.”
Better yet have the FBI not mislead the public. Then your job of informing them will be infinitely easier.
FBI was Misleading (basically everything it said):
It was not an act of terrorism (it was a hate crime)
Farook’s phone likely does not have any valuable information on it
It was a mistake when the FBI had the passcode changed
The county did not change the passcode on its own
It was not a single iPhone issue
It would set a precedent
It was a backdoor
It would not circumvent encryption
It would not work on the newer phones
It would not disable encryption of apps that use it on the phone (There are 600 encryption messaging apps (400 are foreign) available)
Apple did not design encryption to thwart law enforcement (in fact law enforcement at one time was demanding Apple create safeguards that would make it less attractive for thieves to steal iPhones)
It was not Apple’s branding as the reason for not creating a back door
Misleading the FBI is a crime but evidently not the other way around.
Current Secretary of Defense is against backdoors and for encryption.
Former head of NSA is against backdoors and for encryption.
Former head of Homeland Security is against backdoors and for encryption.
Misleading is part of that government’s reason of being. I do remember so vividly,
– Saddam Hussein was involved in 9-11
– Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
– Bin Laden wass hiding in Iraq.
– Saddam’s government posed an immediate threat to that country (actually any peace loving country posed a national threat to that war mongering nation).
And how they WHAAAAAAA whined at the United Nations and how they walked away from the democratic process of voting cause they knew it wasn’t going to go their way.
So when it comes to misleading and that government, it’s Mission Accomplished. It’s in their DNA (Destructive Nuclear Weapons).
This is just the same old same old.
What I really like about Salihin Kondoker’s letter, which is posted in full (see Apple posts amicus briefs in support of Apple vs. U.S. government overreach) says, and I quote: “We are proud to call America home and prouder still to be raising 3 children here. We are also Muslim and have always taught our children that religion is about love and community.”
I’m proud to call my planet home but there are some nationhoods that I’d not recommend for those looking for free and civilized behavior.
I think the invasion was because Iraq had tried to kill George H. W. Bush in Saudi Arabia.
You mean Bush senior? Oh gosh, I never heard of that actually, got a link or something I can plug into the search engine.
I know a lot of people thought that Bush senior should have gone all the way in the Kuwait/Iraqi war (that was dessert storm was it) but I never heard of any assassination attempt.
By all means elucidate me, this is new and I’d love to read about it.
Here’s the link regarding the device.
Here’s the denial of course. The incident made the national news in the USA.
Here’s one: http: just search G H W Bush assassination attempt in Kuwait
//www.history.com/this-day-in-history/clinton-punishes-iraq-for-plot-to-kill-bush
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/08/bush-assassination-plotters-released/1#.VtjrQ_BOKrU
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/062793.htm
And of course revisionists get there chance:
http://rense.com/general67/comdt.htm
there is no privacy!
your medical records: they can be gotten from your doctors office. why are you worried about you phone? your neighbors, kids, spouse… cause the courts can easily get those records, hey insurance companies have your records and can get them any time.
your phone calls: come on, really. you think they are hidden from the government. at least two others have that.
pictures: ok. stop taking compromising pictures. what’s wrong with you.
personal thoughts: ok, but if you had written them down, guess what. so just keep your thoughts to yourself.
it’s a matter of time before somebody who wants to take up apple’s challenge and crack the phone… and tell no one.
you want privacy, really, then keep it in your head and tell no one. can you keep a secret? then why tell your phone?
Let’s see if Apple will help this lady get her job back… This is one of those things… just don’t do
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/gone-viral/os-ap-teacher-resigns-nude-photos-cellphone-20160303-story.html
This would have never happened if the San Bernardino guy simply went with Android! Come to think of it, he seems more like an Android user. Apple fans are much better than that guy!
I wonder what the old civil rights lawyers and big name attorneys feel about the privacy issue. You know, the Alan Dershowitzes of the country.