Powles & Chaparro: "In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths"
Lettura vivamente raccomandata. juan carlos* * *----------- * *In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths* /A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed/ Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most valuable brand, Apple <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/apple>, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI. Two titans of spin <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/28/fbi-surveillance-cybers...>, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/17/apple-ordered-to-hack-iphone-...> that Apple help it crack the iPhone <https://medium.com/@thegrugq/feeble-noise-pollution-627acb5931a2#.fe9moeyrk> of one of the San Bernardino killers <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2015/dec/02/san-bernardino-shooting-...> has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/28/apple-fbi-case-dropped-san...>. There was always more to the Apple v FBI case <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/20/apple-fbi-iphone-explainer...> than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/opinion/sunday/in-the-government-vs-apple-...> than any of us <http://concurringopinions.com/archives/2016/03/a-social-theory-of-surveillan...>. With little relation <http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/03/the-digital-security-d...> to reality <http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/attack-of-week-apple-imessag...>, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look <http://fortune.com/2016/03/29/apple-fbi-tim-cook-2/>, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment. […] Continua qui: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
Grazie. Uno dei pochi articoli sensati che abbia letto in queste settimane. Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato meglio avere una procedura trasparente e controllata (è bene ricordare che l'ordine del giudice avrebbe permesso ad Apple di mantenere un controllo notevole sia sul dispositivo, sia sul sistema operativo modificato, sia sull'intera procedura di accesso ai dati) invece di una procedura opaca. Ciao, Andrea On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Lettura vivamente raccomandata.
juan carlos
*----------- *
*In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths*
*A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed*
Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro
Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST
It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most valuable brand, Apple <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/apple>, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI. Two titans of spin <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/28/fbi-surveillance-cybers...>, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/17/apple-ordered-to-hack-iphone-...> that Apple help it crack the iPhone <https://medium.com/@thegrugq/feeble-noise-pollution-627acb5931a2#.fe9moeyrk> of one of the San Bernardino killers <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2015/dec/02/san-bernardino-shooting-...> has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/28/apple-fbi-case-dropped-san...> .
There was always more to the Apple v FBI case <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/20/apple-fbi-iphone-explainer...> than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/opinion/sunday/in-the-government-vs-apple-...> than any of us <http://concurringopinions.com/archives/2016/03/a-social-theory-of-surveillan...>. With little relation <http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/03/the-digital-security-d...> to reality <http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/attack-of-week-apple-imessag...>, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look <http://fortune.com/2016/03/29/apple-fbi-tim-cook-2/>, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment.
[…]
Continua qui: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
-- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
Grazie per la segnalazione. "ENISA has spoken out against creating backdoors for law enforcement agencies to access encrypted communication..." http://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-cybersecurity-agency-slams-c... 2016-03-31 12:32 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it>:
Grazie. Uno dei pochi articoli sensati che abbia letto in queste settimane.
Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato meglio avere una procedura trasparente e controllata (è bene ricordare che l'ordine del giudice avrebbe permesso ad Apple di mantenere un controllo notevole sia sul dispositivo, sia sul sistema operativo modificato, sia sull'intera procedura di accesso ai dati) invece di una procedura opaca.
Ciao,
Andrea
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Lettura vivamente raccomandata.
juan carlos
-----------
In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths
A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed
Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro
Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST
It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most valuable brand, Apple, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI. Two titans of spin, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand that Apple help it crack the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party.
There was always more to the Apple v FBI case than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle than any of us. With little relation to reality, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment.
[…]
Continua qui: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Guido Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer) Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ noto.la.diega@gmail.com +44(0)2078823386 @guidonld https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669 This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you. Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke. Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie. BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
Caro Guido, Non sono sicuro di capire il nesso tra l'articolo, la mia reazione e la posizione di ENISA, ma a scanso di equivoci, né io né ENISA parliamo a nome dell'Unione Europea (io perché qui esprimo posizioni personali, ENISA in quanto agenzia indipendente il cui ruolo è prevalentemente consultivo, non decisionale - vedi https://www.enisa.europa.eu/about-enisa/activities per ulteriori dettagli). Per altro anche Andrus Ansip, Vice-Presidente della Commissione Europea, si è ripetutamente espresso pubblicamente contro l'uso di "back-door". Il problema è che secondo me ognuno sta usando il termine "back-door" senza mettersi d'accordo sulla semantica. :) Ciao, Andrea On Thursday, March 31, 2016, Guido Noto La Diega <noto.la.diega@gmail.com> wrote:
Grazie per la segnalazione. "ENISA has spoken out against creating backdoors for law enforcement agencies to access encrypted communication..."
http://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-cybersecurity-agency-slams-c...
2016-03-31 12:32 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it <javascript:;>>:
Grazie. Uno dei pochi articoli sensati che abbia letto in queste settimane.
Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato meglio avere una procedura trasparente e controllata (è bene ricordare che l'ordine del giudice avrebbe permesso ad Apple di mantenere un controllo notevole sia sul dispositivo, sia sul sistema operativo modificato, sia sull'intera procedura di accesso ai dati) invece di una procedura opaca.
Ciao,
Andrea
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it <javascript:;>> wrote:
Lettura vivamente raccomandata.
juan carlos
-----------
In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths
A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed
Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro
Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST
It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most valuable brand, Apple, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI.
Two
titans of spin, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand that Apple help it crack the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party.
There was always more to the Apple v FBI case than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle than any of us. With little relation to reality, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment.
[…]
Continua qui:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Guido
Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University
President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things
Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer)
Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo
Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
noto.la.diega@gmail.com <javascript:;>
+44(0)2078823386
@guidonld
https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669
This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you.
Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke.
Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie.
BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
-- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
Caro Andrea, non era una replica a te (anzi, concordo con quello che dici), quanto un collegamento tematico all'argomento introdotto dal Co-direttore. Non credo che ENISA parli a nome dell'UE, notoriamente acefala, cionondimeno offre un punto di vista qualificato. Cheers, Guido 2016-03-31 15:36 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it>:
Caro Guido,
Non sono sicuro di capire il nesso tra l'articolo, la mia reazione e la posizione di ENISA, ma a scanso di equivoci, né io né ENISA parliamo a nome dell'Unione Europea (io perché qui esprimo posizioni personali, ENISA in quanto agenzia indipendente il cui ruolo è prevalentemente consultivo, non decisionale - vedi https://www.enisa.europa.eu/about-enisa/activities per ulteriori dettagli).
Per altro anche Andrus Ansip, Vice-Presidente della Commissione Europea, si è ripetutamente espresso pubblicamente contro l'uso di "back-door". Il problema è che secondo me ognuno sta usando il termine "back-door" senza mettersi d'accordo sulla semantica. :)
Ciao,
Andrea
On Thursday, March 31, 2016, Guido Noto La Diega <noto.la.diega@gmail.com> wrote:
Grazie per la segnalazione. "ENISA has spoken out against creating backdoors for law enforcement agencies to access encrypted communication..."
http://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-cybersecurity-agency-slams-c...
2016-03-31 12:32 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it>:
Grazie. Uno dei pochi articoli sensati che abbia letto in queste settimane.
Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato meglio avere una procedura trasparente e controllata (è bene ricordare che l'ordine del giudice avrebbe permesso ad Apple di mantenere un controllo notevole sia sul dispositivo, sia sul sistema operativo modificato, sia sull'intera procedura di accesso ai dati) invece di una procedura opaca.
Ciao,
Andrea
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it> wrote:
Lettura vivamente raccomandata.
juan carlos
-----------
In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths
A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed
Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro
Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST
It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most valuable brand, Apple, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI. Two titans of spin, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand that Apple help it crack the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party.
There was always more to the Apple v FBI case than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle than any of us. With little relation to reality, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment.
[…]
Continua qui:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Guido
Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University
President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things
Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer)
Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo
Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
noto.la.diega@gmail.com
+44(0)2078823386
@guidonld
https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669
This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you.
Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke.
Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie.
BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
-- Guido Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer) Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ noto.la.diega@gmail.com +44(0)2078823386 @guidonld https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669 This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you. Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke. Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie. BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
Caro Guido, Grazie per il chiarimento. Saluti acefali, :) Andrea On Thursday, March 31, 2016, Guido Noto La Diega <noto.la.diega@gmail.com> wrote:
Caro Andrea, non era una replica a te (anzi, concordo con quello che dici), quanto un collegamento tematico all'argomento introdotto dal Co-direttore. Non credo che ENISA parli a nome dell'UE, notoriamente acefala, cionondimeno offre un punto di vista qualificato. Cheers, Guido
2016-03-31 15:36 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it <javascript:;>>:
Caro Guido,
Non sono sicuro di capire il nesso tra l'articolo, la mia reazione e la posizione di ENISA, ma a scanso di equivoci, né io né ENISA parliamo a nome dell'Unione Europea (io perché qui esprimo posizioni personali, ENISA in quanto agenzia indipendente il cui ruolo è prevalentemente consultivo, non decisionale - vedi https://www.enisa.europa.eu/about-enisa/activities per ulteriori dettagli).
Per altro anche Andrus Ansip, Vice-Presidente della Commissione Europea, si è ripetutamente espresso pubblicamente contro l'uso di "back-door". Il problema è che secondo me ognuno sta usando il termine "back-door" senza mettersi d'accordo sulla semantica. :)
Ciao,
Andrea
On Thursday, March 31, 2016, Guido Noto La Diega < noto.la.diega@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
Grazie per la segnalazione. "ENISA has spoken out against creating backdoors for law enforcement agencies to access encrypted communication..."
http://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/eu-cybersecurity-agency-slams-c...
2016-03-31 12:32 GMT+01:00 Andrea Glorioso <andrea@digitalpolicy.it
<javascript:;>>:
Grazie. Uno dei pochi articoli sensati che abbia letto in queste settimane.
Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato meglio avere una procedura trasparente e controllata (è bene ricordare che l'ordine del giudice avrebbe permesso ad Apple di mantenere un controllo notevole sia sul dispositivo, sia sul sistema operativo modificato, sia sull'intera procedura di accesso ai dati) invece di una procedura opaca.
Ciao,
Andrea
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016, J.C. DE MARTIN <demartin@polito.it <javascript:;>> wrote:
Lettura vivamente raccomandata.
juan carlos
-----------
In the wake of Apple v FBI, we need to address some uncomfortable truths
A temporary truce has emerged in the raging battle between Apple and the FBI, but technology fragility and corporate power remain unaddressed
Julia Powles and Enrique Chaparro
Tuesday 29 March 2016 21.11 BST
It has been a spectacular six-week showdown – the world’s most
valuable
brand, Apple, pitted against the powerful American agents of the FBI. Two titans of spin, locked in a fast-moving battle over a dead terrorist’s smartphone. Now, as dramatically as it exploded, the FBI’s legal demand that Apple help it crack the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino killers has evaporated – the agents hacked their way in anyway, assisted by a mysterious third party.
There was always more to the Apple v FBI case than met the eye – and it is true for this latest twist too. The biggest issue is that both sides stand to gain a lot more from this battle than any of us. With little relation to reality, and backed by a worryingly partisan chorus, the notoriously closed Apple is emerging as a champion of users’ rights. Equally worryingly, a government agency is claiming the power to keep to itself a tool that can potentially break security features on millions of phones, while earmarking a demand for further judicial or legislative intervention in the future. Whichever way you look, this feud is far from a road to freedom in the digital environment.
[…]
Continua qui:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/29/apple-fbi-encryption-san-b...
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- Guido
Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University
President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things
Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer)
Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo
Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
noto.la.diega@gmail.com <javascript:;>
+44(0)2078823386
@guidonld
https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669
This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you.
Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke.
Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie.
BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
--
-- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
-- Guido
Dr. Guido Noto La Diega Associate Lecturer in Law: Intellectual Property Law - Buckinghamshire New University
President of Ital-IoT - Centre of Multidisciplinary Research on the Internet of Things
Avvocato (Commercial and IP/IT Lawyer)
Cultore della materia in Civil Law and Intellectual Property - University of Palermo
Department of Law Queen Alexandra Road High Wycombe Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
noto.la.diega@gmail.com <javascript:;>
+44(0)2078823386
@guidonld
https://it.linkedin.com/pub/guido-noto-la-diega-ph-d/6/614/669
This e-mail and any attachment hereto are strictly confidential and are exclusively intended for the person above identified. Without intended recipient’s entitlement, use, copy and dissemination of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received it in error, please advice us immediately by telephone and return the documents received to the above address, deleting the files. Thank you.
Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestaettet. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Danke.
Il presente messaggio di posta elettronica ed ogni eventuale allegato contengono informazioni strettamente riservate e sono indirizzati esclusivamente al soggetto sopra indicato. In mancanza di autorizzazione del destinatario, ne sono vietati l’uso, la riproduzione e la divulgazione. Se avete ricevuto questo messaggio per errore, siete pregati di avvisarci immediatamente per telefono e di restituirci i documenti ricevuti all’indirizzo sopra indicato, distruggendo i file. Grazie.
BE ECO-FRIENDLY: Unless necessary, please do not print this e-mail
-- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
participants (3)
-
Andrea Glorioso -
Guido Noto La Diega -
J.C. DE MARTIN