Like Amandine Aurore Lucie Dupin through the hourglass , so are the iPhones the government wants Apple ’s avail breaking into .
latterly , the FBI said it had paid for a “ tool ” that broke into the iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook . The FBI also pronounce that even though this tool allegedly works on a narrow piece of phone , they ’d be happy to avail other law enforcement agencies use it to break into interlock phones they ’ve seized in the class of investigate crimes .
But one phone it ca n’t crack is an iPhone 5s running iOS 7 that was used by a meth dealer discover Jun Feng in a drug case in New York . We ’d already see a little about this case when Magistrate Judge James Orenstein ruled in recent February thatApple did n’t have to allow for assistance , and the All Writs Act ( which was also called into question in the San Bernardino case ) was n’t sufficient for issuing this order .
Of course , that opinion was appealedby the regime , and on Friday thegovernment submitted a letterreminding the court that the matter is still open and that the political science still necessitate Apple ’s aid . The full letter of the alphabet is here :
In re order of magnitude Requiring Apple Inc. to Assist in the Execution of a Search WarrantbyKif Leswing
Apple’s next steps
Apple held a conference call with newsman on Friday and its attorney , speak on background , said they would go on to fight this appeal . The society is n’t refusing to aid the administration incur selective information , but Apple attorneys emphasized that Apple only require to give over information they had in their self-control , on their own server , such as iCloud backups .
Since Feng ’s iPhone 5s is running iOS 7 , the information on it is n’t encrypt by nonremittal , and Apple does have a method to educe that data without ask to know the locked phone ’s passcode . The company has done this in the past tense , but is now taking a harder stance because it does n’t feel that the countenance , bring out under the All Writs Act , is lawful .
The All Writs Act , which was also at the tenderness of the San Bernardino sheath , has been interpreted by the court as reserve the government to compel third parties ( like Apple ) to assist law enforcement under a few condition , one being that the assistance is really necessary . In the New York case , Judge Orenstein apparently did n’t feel the politics had made a unspoiled enough argument for this , and instead was follow up on a precedent for using the All Writs Act to oblige , well , pretty much anything . Orenstein wrote in his opinion , “ It is thus clear that the government is relying on the AWA as a seed of self-assurance that is legislative in every meaningful way : something that can be cite as a basis for getting the backup man it essay in case after face without any demand for adjudication of the particular circumstance of an individual case . ”
In San Bernardino , the regime claimed multiple time that only Apple could unlock the earpiece ( the FBI was even ask Apple to rewrite a one - off variation of Io to get around its security protections ) , and then abruptly arrogate they ’d get into the telephone set with another third - party tool and would not be quest after that slip further . According to Apple ’s attorneys , the fact that the Department of Justice is still pursuing the New York case — in which the methamphetamine dealer in interrogation has already confessed and is due to be condemn in May — shows that the political science did n’t impart the San Bernardino typesetter’s case purely to fight terrorism , and that the regime ’s destination is sure as shooting bigger than any one phone .
Apple will file a briefing in the New York case next Thursday and finally there will be a hearing . Apple ’s lawyer said that they hope the evaluator see the appear , Judge Margo Brodie , will press the FBI on why Apple ’s aid is necessary in this pillowcase , when it seemingly was n’t for the encrypted telephone in the San Bernardino case . Apple enounce they wo n’t be litigate the regime to encounter out what the solution wound up being in the San Bernardino case , and is n’t interested in that solution becoming public , or in forcing the FBI to bring out its secrets or its methods in royal court . But it does n’t seem fair for an adjunct U.S. lawyer to be capable to say , effectively , Apple take to serve us , your honour , please make them , without game that up with some showing of what ’s already been tried .
Long - terminus , Apple would still like the solution tocome from Congress , but its attorneys did n’t yet have an thought on the “ Feinstein Burr bill ” that was leak in a draft variant on Thursday , title the “ compliancy with Court Orders Act of 2016 ” ( PDF ) , since they had n’t read it . The negative response to that visor by security experts wasswiftandsevere . “ This fundamentally outlaws end - to - ending encryption , ” Joseph Lorenzo Hall , master technologist at the Center for Democracy and Technology , assure Wired . “ It ’s effectively the most anti - crypto bill of all anti - crypto bills . ”
