The nonstop pace of "Apple vs. FBI" updates and related crypto debates seemed to exceed both the U.S. government's and the information security industry's advanced persistent spin-cycles at this year's RSA Conference.
The Justice Department's appeal of a court order that the government can't compel Apple to unlock an iPhone used by an accused drug dealer is significant because it sets in motion a process that could lead to a Supreme Court ruling on whether mobile device makers must give law enforcement an encryption backdoor.
The first case of fully functional ransomware designed to infect and forcibly encrypt Apple OS X systems has been discovered in the wild, researchers at Palo Alto Networks warn.
Apple's standoff with the U.S. government is creating a healthy debate about whether federal investigators, under certain circumstances, should have the right to circumvent the security functions of smartphones and other devices, says cybersecurity attorney Chris Pierson.
From the moment the RSA Conference 2016 launched, speakers began debating the merits of the Apple/FBI case. Eminent cryptographers, NSA Director Mike Rogers and U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch all offered related opinions.
The impasse over whether Apple should help law enforcement open encrypted iPhones continued during a House hearing, as FBI Director James Comey and Apple's top lawyer, Bruce Sewell, didn't budge from their positions.
A federal magistrate in Brooklyn, N.Y., unlike another judge in California, has denied a request by federal authorities to force Apple to retrieve data from an iPhone, this time in a New York narcotics case.
Think it's tough now for the government to compel Apple to retrieve encrypted data from a locked iPhone? According to news reports, Apple is busy creating new devices and services that will be even harder to hack.
Who's right: Apple or the FBI? Our readers continue to debate a magistrate judge ordering Apple to help unlock an iPhone tied to a San Bernardino shooter, raising such issues as strong crypto, backdoors as well as legal and moral responsibilities.
The war of words continues to heat up between the Justice Department and Apple over the FBI's request that the technology provider help it unlock an iPhone seized during the San Bernardino shootings investigation.
It's the perfect time to debate whether the government should compel Apple to help the FBI circumvent protections blocking access to the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone. Hear Apple CEO Tim Cook, FBI Director James Comey, Sen. Marco Rubio and cryptologist Bruce Schneier in this audio report.
Apple is preparing for a long legal battle over the FBI's attempt to backdoor the encryption on an iPhone seized as part of an investigation. Experts say the case could have profound repercussions on technology and society.
A Hollywood hospital acknowledges paying ransom to unlock data seized by attackers. But while experts generally caution against paying extortionists, some organizations do indeed fold under the pressure to get their critical data back quickly.
Apple CEO Tim Cook has blasted a U.S. federal judge's Feb. 16 order compelling Apple to help bypass the encryption on an iPhone seized by the FBI, saying the crypto backdoor would set a "dangerous" precedent.
The U.S. and U.K. government push to "backdoor" strong crypto - used to secure everything from online banking and e-commerce to patient health records and consumer communications - wouldn't stop most criminals or terrorists, researchers warn.
Our website uses cookies. Cookies enable us to provide the best experience possible and help us understand how visitors use our website. By browsing databreachtoday.eu, you agree to our use of cookies.