Vulnerabilities / Threats
3/21/2016
10:00 AM
50%
50%

#SaveSecurity Campaign Protests FBI's iPhone Unlocking Request

Fight for the Future will publicly display and read aloud thousands of comments outside the US District courthouse at Apple vs. FBI hearing on March 22.

Fight for the Future, a digital rights group, is all set to raise voices against what it calls the FBI's attempts to force Apple to weaken iPhone security. The group has launched an online campaign #SaveSecurity to collect comments from people worried about the implication of FBI's request for Apple to unlock the phone belonging to a terror suspect in the San Bernardino shootings.

#SaveSecurity has gained support from tech companies and advocacy groups, including Reddit, Google, Wikimedia, CREDO Mobile, Private Internet Access, Thunderclap, Goldenfrog, the ACLU, and the Freedom of the Press Foundation, along with prominent technology experts Bruce Schneier and Cory Doctorow. 

Advocates will hold a press conference before and immediately after the hearing tomorrow, March 22, outside the courthouse. At the same time, protestors will be demonstrating comments collected from #SaveSecurity campaign through a digital display. 

"It is not only about a single phone, but it is a matter of safety and security for millions of people all over the world," said Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future. He said the group will be present outside the courthouse to ensure that people's voices are heard, because what the government is demanding will put all in danger.

The Digital Rights Group was also behind 50 rapid response protests outside Apple stores and FBI headquarters last month. For more information on the #SaveSecurity, click here.

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/22/2016 | 12:20:52 PM
Surveillance vs. Privacy
This is the quintessential discussion of security vs. privacy. It seems that at this juncture, at least from what I've seen, the argument is more heavily weighted towards advocating privacy. John Oliver does a good job in my opinion backing that stance as well recently on his show Last Week Tonight.

I would like to see the opposite advocacy made, not for this case because what the FBI is requesting isn't feasible to maintain any shread of privacy, but overall. When does surveillance/security supersede the need for privacy?
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
8 Key Building Blocks for Enterprise Network Defense
Networks are changing rapidly -- and so are strategies for protecting them. This Tech Digest looks at the fundamentals for the next-gen environment.
Flash Poll
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-7445
Published: 2015-10-15
The Direct Rendering Manager (DRM) subsystem in the Linux kernel through 4.x mishandles requests for Graphics Execution Manager (GEM) objects, which allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via an application that processes graphics data, as demonstrated b...

CVE-2015-4948
Published: 2015-10-15
netstat in IBM AIX 5.3, 6.1, and 7.1 and VIOS 2.2.x, when a fibre channel adapter is used, allows local users to gain privileges via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-5660
Published: 2015-10-15
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in eXtplorer before 2.1.8 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that execute PHP code.

CVE-2015-6003
Published: 2015-10-15
Directory traversal vulnerability in QNAP QTS before 4.1.4 build 0910 and 4.2.x before 4.2.0 RC2 build 0910, when AFP is enabled, allows remote attackers to read or write to arbitrary files by leveraging access to an OS X (1) user or (2) guest account.

CVE-2015-6333
Published: 2015-10-15
Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC) 1.1j allows local users to gain privileges via vectors involving addition of an SSH key, aka Bug ID CSCuw46076.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In this episode of Dark Reading Radio, veteran CISOs will share their experience and insight into how organizations can get the best bang for their security buck.