If you will remember, the FBI said they only wanted a backdoor to the Apple iPhone for the San Bernardino case – it was just that one case. Well, they didn’t level with us. There are now a dozen lawsuits in which the government is demanding Apple give them the key.
We said it wasn’t over even though they promised it was just this one case – the government is exploring these cases to turn our privacy rights over to Daddy government.
The federal government plans to pursue a Brooklyn drug case in which it’s compelling Apple to unlock an iPhone.
The Department of Justice said Friday it is pressing forward in its legal fight to force Apple’s assistance in unlocking an iPhone linked to a drug conspiracy case in New York City.
“The government’s application is not moot and the government continues to require Apple’s assistance in accessing the data that it is authorized to search by warrant,” U.S. Attorney Robert Capers wrote to the court according to RE/Code.
In the San Bernardino case, FBI Director Comey said the encryption was just for the one terror case and he won the battle for public opinion with that line though it was false. Now they are seeking the same rights in Brooklyn – they want the key.
It’s not about assistance, help, or just one case or even two or three. They want to design Apple’s system so they have ongoing access to anyone’s phone.
Apple attorneys fear the Department of Justice is attempting to set a precedent with the Brooklyn case that would allow the government to crack any device as it sees fit and without providing due process.
The Brooklyn drug case is one of a dozen lawsuits in which the DoJ is seeking access to locked iPhones.
The government is trying to force a company to make itself weaker. If they can do that, where does it stop? Didn’t we learn anything from the mandate?
The former NSA Chief Michael Hayden agrees with Apple. He said, “— and you should not go beyond a certain point. And my judgment, in this particular case is that universal backdoors, although it may facilitate American law enforcement for very good purposes, on balance, on balance, actually are an overall negative for American security, not just American privacy.”
The FBI is basically demanding Apple design its operating system to allow the FBI to get into cell phones by itself and not have to ask Apple for help.
Bruce Sewell, Apple’s general counsel, warned legislators on the House judiciary committee that the 16 February court order on Apple to help the FBI break into the iPhone would, if enacted, create a digital vulnerability that jeopardises another US government imperative: cybersecurity.
“Hackers and cyber criminals could use this to wreak havoc on our privacy and personal safety,” Sewell will tell the House panel.
“Some of you might have an iPhone in your pocket right now, and if you think about it, there’s probably more information stored on that iPhone than a thief could steal by breaking into your house,” Sewell will testify.
General David Patraeus, former director of the CIA, today came out strongly in favor of Apple resisting the FBI’s demands to create a “backdoor” into the iPhone.
“Do I want Apple to make a backdoor to enable [accessing suspects’ phone]? I would say no,” Patraeus said in an interview on Fox Business.
Like Hayden, Patraeus said the net impact to America’s security will be negative, as the “universal lock” will be impossible to contain.
“I don’t think Apple should be compelled to make a backdoor,” Patraeus said, “because I think it would make the entire technology so much more unsafe.”
“I don’t think [the solution] can be a universal backdoor that’s there,” he continued, “because there’s no question that those who wish us ill will find it, will use it for criminal purposes, will use it for other purposes.”