| ▲ | tokyobreakfast 3 hours ago |
| What is your proof they don't have a duplicate key that also unlocks it? A firm handshake from Tim? |
|
| ▲ | eddyg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You should watch the whole BlackHat talk (from 2016!) from Apple's Head of Security Engineering and Architecture, but especially this part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLGFriOKz6U&t=1993s |
|
| ▲ | otterley 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| If they say they don't, and they do, then that's fraud, and they could be held liable for any damages that result. And, if word got out that they were defrauding customers, that would result in serious reputational damage to Apple (who uses their security practices as an industry differentiator) and possibly a significant customer shift away from them. They don't want that. |
| |
| ▲ | direwolf20 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The government would never prosecute a company for fraud where that fraud consists of cooperating with the government after promising to a suspected criminal that they wouldn't. | | |
| ▲ | otterley 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's not the scenario I was thinking of. There are other possibilities here, like providing a decryption key (even if by accident) to a criminal who's stolen a business's laptop, or if a business had made contractual promises to their customers, based on Apple's promises to them. The actions would be private (civil) ones, not criminal fraud prosecution. Besides, Apple's lawyers aren't stupid enough to forget to carve out a law-enforcement demand exception. |
| |
| ▲ | tokyobreakfast 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Absent the source code, it's incredibly difficult to disprove when the only proof you have is good vibes. | | |
| ▲ | otterley 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | There are many things you can't prove or disprove in this world. That's where trust and reputation comes in - to fill the uncertainty gap. | | |
|
|
