Can secure, personal technology be an extension of the mind?

[Anchor]

I've been following the Apple vs FBI case with interest.

Some thoughts have started to join up...

I understand that in America it is not possible for the DOJ to permit a warrant for the search of someones mind. Furthermore there is a 5th amendment that protects anyone from the requirement incriminate oneself under oath.

Obama recently made reference to the fetishing of phones. (Which I assume to mean, in the sense of a psychological dependence on them).

I have a particularly sharp interest in impenetrable encryption. If I had a technology that was secure against any search and only open to my inspection or use because I alone possessed the key, then I might have something which could act as a viable extension of my mind, and something that might deserve the same protections as my mind from search. This would only be permissible to me if the security was impenetrable - such as is possible today with well implemented encryption.

Currently the closest thing we have is the modern smartphone run in high security mode, and a phone that is not really even at the bleeding edge of security technology is now having the sanctity of its security being tested in a very interesting court case. The key died with its user, but can we permit it to be cracked open to reveal the secrets the FBI suspect may be within it?

I believe I should have the option to keep secrets on my phone such that they can be disclosed to no one, and thus, I would like to have the option that I can treat it as an extension of my mind.

If FBI win against Apple, then it will be very hard to go down this path.

How this pans out will affect the secure any future "intimate" relation between mind and machine for many years.

It is vitally important and so I suspect that the maximum force available to the government, by all means fair and foul will be deployed to ensure they win this argument.

I hope they do not win it.

I hope we can one day, we can, if we so desire, keep secrets which exist external to our minds but which have the same protections that we chose to give them and that cannot be infringed for any reason save our freely given explicit consent.

[amor]

Keep your thoughts to yourself and keep them clean.

[TigaHawk]

They have always been able to crack / access the contents on an Iphone. And they always will.

I am fairly sure they already do this on a regular basis here in Australia and have for some time. All they need is the phone in their possession and a court order. For the newer phones that are unlocked by fingerprint it's even easier - no court order required - they just make you press it to unlock it. They use a loophole in the law for that one as they already have your fingerprint if you are charged or have been - they're just using it again and i don't think it's classed as your private property either.

I am more interested in why they feel the need for this song and dance.

[TargeT]

My phone, my wifes phone and 8 computers in my house are easily "unhackable" by the NSA.... I use 4096 -bit encryption; at current computing levels it would take nothing short of a quantum computer to break my messages to my wife to pick up milk on her way home.

but you know what? I love that I'm giving a headache to some NSA toad.

they have NOT always been able to crack encryption... in fact they suck balls at it. (they = me... I work for the federal government)


As for the OP's question........ ABSOLUTELY

any tech that is intimately used becomes a part of your persona.

if you think that assumption is incorrect try asking your friend or loved one to go with out their smart phone for a period of 8 hours... see what happens... haha.

[uzn]

Always remember:
everything that can be hacked, will be hacked. In case of brainimplants, neurobridges and stuff its way more dangerous, once hacked the target has no way of knowing if the images, sound etc. that he percives are real or just put in by another source.
Transhumanism is just a better way to directly access and influence the brain of the target (direct control).

[Anchor]

I am more interested in why they feel the need for this song and dance.

To establish dominance.

I think this all goes back to the idea of "full spectrum dominance" that was in the project for a new American century.

In Australia, as I am sure you know, if the government suspect you of serious crime like "terrorism" then they can compel you to hand over the passphrase for encrypted material with 2 years in the slammer if you cant or wont do that - there are very few defenses and these things are almost always done in secrecy with gag orders.