We can imagine that the government either has ideological capture of apple - that the management of apple agree to install hard to exploit vulnerabilities tailored for US government use - or legal capture through FISA rulings.
I’d be curious if anyone can summarize the latest understanding of FISA court actions in this realm.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/28/apple-fbi...
The problem with conspiracies is everyone involved knows it’s a secret. If you’re the CIA, it’s much less risky to compromise a chip design engineer than have everyone from the CEO down at Apple in on the plant.
It’s not apple but I think a lot about how Eric Schmidt of google was directly meeting with US military officials and talking about how important US defense was.
You can end up with a situation where the chip designer and some higher up both know what is happening and the higher up is there as a check to provide cover in case the chip designer is caught up in suspicion. (“No we asked for this for the manufacturing team.” Kind of thing.)
Of course this is all conjecture with no evidence and I understand why we don’t want to spend much energy on discussions we can’t confirm, but at the same time it is frustrating when the default assumption is that apple had no knowledge about this. The truth is that we don’t know and likely will never know.
It sure quacks like a duck.
I wouldn't expect them to have HSM keys or anything but a mirror of their VCS? Yeah the NSA probably has that.
What stock was crushed by Snowden revelations?
Compare with minute 22:40 of the talk
As well as https://imgur.com/a/82JV7I9
Let’s say your old boss was embezzling and got away with it. Now you are the boss, and if you go public with it, not only are they out of power and likely nothing will happen, but all the freedom and flexibility you have in the same position is gone, and you or your friends have an island-problem you would rather not get into.
Maybe it’s just better to not rile up the shareholders.