Does an extremist's iPhone contain a "cyber pathogen"?

Um... really?

A local prosecutor has offered an unusual justification for forcing Apple to help hack an iPhone used by a San Bernardino mass killer: The phone might have been "used as a weapon" to introduce malicious software to county computer systems.

Here's the rest of the story. user link on phys.org

Though that might be worth a read.

I think they're reaching a bit here.

If they have a warrant (and they obviously do) and it's just the matter of getting into a single iPhone, this wouldn't even be news.

The issue is that they want to force Apple to create a modification to iOS to allow an override to some security measures that ordinarily prevent brute force attacks against a phone's pass code. Once this is developed, if it leaks, it will significantly compromise the security of all iPhones in existence.

Also noteworthy is the fact that requests to unlock several other unrelated iPhones, in the same manner, have already been submitted to Apple.

Getting a little controversial here but I think this case is not simply about getting into the San Bernardino terrorist's employer's iPhone. It's about precedent and providing not a backdoor but something that is effectively a backdoor.

The "cyber-pathogen" theory sounds patently ridiculous to me. If there were a virus someone wanted to spread, they wouldn't lock it away in a single iPhone that may or may not ever be unlocked.

The FBI is reaching.

I have suspected for quite some time that actual backdoors have existed in all smartphones as well as desktop operating systems for a long time.

Apple's objections to the FBI's requests are likely more of a public relations move than a true resistance to mass surveillance. It's not that I think these companies are evil; it's that I find it hard to believe that they could refuse the government's demands while they operate within the country.

Think about how much current technology can facilitate mass, automated surveillance. Smart phones were very quick to implement GPS and cameras. Certainly, these aren't exclusively for tracking and monitoring the public but I do think there's a certain amount of social engineering involved in the move to social media and the "oversharing" culture.

I'm not paranoid enough to think that the government has any specific interest in me but if it's technically possible to monitor nearly everyone, it's naive to think that this capability goes unused.

The way I see it, we are going to have mandatory back doors in everything sooner or later. Even if Apple wins the case - presuming there aren't already back doors - there's eventually going to be a terrorist attack or something that will be used to finally justify measures.

It's not a question of if but when.