[Cryptography] EFF amicus brief in support of Apple

[Tom Mitchell]

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill at hallambaker.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Allen <allenpmd at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sold on the "code is speech" argument.  Building a utilitarian,
> > non-expressive machine is not speech.  Building a utilitarian,
> > non-expressive machine that contains code does not turn either the
> machine
> > nor the code into speech.  Certainly code can be a form of speech,
> depending
> > on its content and intent, but not all code is speech.  In this case
> > however, I don't think the non-expressive portions of Apple's OS nor its
> > firmware are speech, nor would unpublished code (such as Apple is being
> > asked to provide) constitute speech, nor would signing unpublished code
> > constitute speech.
>
> I think it is a weak argument to use in this case.
>
> The FBI can reply by writing the code itself and then getting a
> warrant forcing Apple to sign it. Code is speech but is adding a
> digital signature? I rather doubt it.
>

If this was a jury case one might ask the question about signatures.
Can the court demand you put your name and signature on a check making a
payment
to a criminal?

Can the court demand you as citizens put your name and signature on a box
of ballots to be taken to be counted for the next presidential election
when you
are well aware that the contents of the box do not represent the wishes of
the citizens casting a ballot?

Can the court demand you to say something in writing repugnant and contrary
to your primary business and source of income and then sign it?

A slave once could have been compelled to do the bidding of the owner and
master.
How different is is for the court to compel Apple and engineers at
Apple to labor under the threat of incarceration build something they
would normally not build and then sign it?  Further sign in a way that
demonstrates
to others that the service is possible and can be compelled, again.

Can the FBI and its agents draft the jury opinion and results and
demand the foreman of the jury sign, submit and attest to the document?
Can the FBI secure this by issuing 12  FISA warrants after convincing
a judge that these 12 citizens are uniquely placed and uniquely
qualified to rule in a way favorable to the expressed needs of
national security and shall be compelled to say nothing?

Apple's digital signature is tied to their credible responsibility that
software
they sign is theirs and in the best interest of their customers and Apple's
business.

As a minimum the existence of compelled software lays waste to the EULA.
That opens other doors and with software in hand I might demand that my
custom bits on a USB stick be signed and installed on the single physical
device
in the same bag as the USB stick.

Signatures are a big thing.


-- 
  T o m    M i t c h e l l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20160304/65570686/attachment.html>