[jmiwhite]

> There’s nothing preventing the FBI from writing that hacked software itself, aside from budget and manpower issues.

My understanding is that this isn't correct, and is in fact the focal point of the order:

> This signature check is why the FBI cannot load new software onto an iPhone on their own — the FBI does not have the secret keys that Apple uses to sign firmware.

http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...

Is it possible for anyone to load a modified firmware without Apple's signing keys?

[pdkl95]

The FBI can subpoena/nsl/all-writs-act the necessary signing key, if necessary. That would probably be easier than ordering Apple to write a new (miss-)feature, as this would only be turning over existing data, similar to a subpoena for common business records or the footage from a surveillance-camera.

[jmiwhite]

I'm not sure I'd rather have the FBI in possession of their signing key either :)

[noir_lord]

As a non US person me either, I wonder what the long term prospects for US tech firms will be like in a post-snowden world, general public mostly doesn't care but techies in other countries do.

I'm in the process of pull our stuff back towards virtualization on hardware we control in a DC up the road, it's not that our gov are any better but at least it minimises one risk surface.

[DyslexicAtheist]

indeed what puzzles me most in the public discussion is that it revolves around the effects to US citizens. Not just in this discussion but also others that evaluate backdooring or outlawing encryption, there is a strong argument (mostly from law enforcement friendly camps) on how to best do this from a semi tech-perspective. And I wonder have they actually thought further about what happens if not just Apple but Google, Microsoft, and the network vendors (CISCO, Alcatel etc) are going to be forced to intentionally break their security in some way.

Never mind the Chinese then requesting their own backdoors in US products or localized versions of these backdoors. The bigger issue is who will buy their stuff? How do they market their products without being laughed at? EU market might be splintered and can easily be dismissed compared to Asia in volume and EU is currently loudest in terms of pro-privacy (often just so they can say they are in the face of the US to cover their own incompetence (disclosure: European here)). The way I see it from a business pov: if you break a reasonably good product and everyone knows it's broken then other competitors maybe in other markets will move in to fill the gap.

[Terr_]

> indeed what puzzles me most in the public discussion is that it revolves around the effects to US citizens.

Well, debates about US laws involve how those laws affect things and people within US jurisdiction, who are almost entirely US residents.

And IMO it's a very very good thing when judges decide based on what the actual law is, rather than based on what some transnational corporation's balance sheet might look like next quarter.

[colanderman]

I wonder if Apple has the capability to revoke their signing key in existing devices and replace it with a new one.