DoJ Wants To Overturn NY Judge’s Precedent-Setting Ruling Against Unlocking iPhones

[Lucian Armasu]

The Department of Justice asked a different Court overseeing the one in Brookly, New York, to overturn Judge James Orenstein's ruling that Apple can't be compelled to unlock iPhones.

DoJ Wants To Overturn NY Judge’s Precedent-Setting Ruling Against Unlocking iPhones : Read more

 

[hellwig]

Here's my question, HOW can the government possibly force anyone to unlock the iPhone? Even if the government imposes sanctions against Apple forcing them to cooperate, wouldn't Apple's employees, law-abiding citizens (mostly) of the U.S., have every right to refuse to develop said program? What would happen to them? If Apple clearly doesn't want to create the program, are they going to threaten to fire their employees who, as individuals, refuse to write said program? Can the government force Apple to force their employees to write this program?

Imagine getting fired because the FBI wants to crack into someone else's phone. Someone you've never had any interactions with. What if all the developers with the necessary skills say no. Can the government force Apple to hire or train other people to write said program? Can they force Apple to hand over IP to another company, allowing said company to write said program?

This goes far beyond one phone, anyone who can't see that is blind.

 

[falchard]

The all writs act compels a company to do what they can without unnecessary burden in the assistance of a criminal investigation. For instance a company can say no due to the cost of labor to do so. Or in Apple's case, design security flaws into their devices.
Outside just a looking into and the investigator will need to contract the work. It carries no legal authority for the usage of force against individuals who don't comply.

 

[sykozis]

Here's my question, HOW can the government possibly force anyone to unlock the iPhone? Even if the government imposes sanctions against Apple forcing them to cooperate, wouldn't Apple's employees, law-abiding citizens (mostly) of the U.S., have every right to refuse to develop said program? What would happen to them? If Apple clearly doesn't want to create the program, are they going to threaten to fire their employees who, as individuals, refuse to write said program? Can the government force Apple to force their employees to write this program?

Imagine getting fired because the FBI wants to crack into someone else's phone. Someone you've never had any interactions with. What if all the developers with the necessary skills say no. Can the government force Apple to hire or train other people to write said program? Can they force Apple to hand over IP to another company, allowing said company to write said program?

This goes far beyond one phone, anyone who can't see that is blind.

No, the Government can not force Apple to hand over their own intellectual property to another company nor can the government force Apple to hire or train anyone for any purpose.

This is just further proving the belief that the Government has an agenda and isn't only interested in this one case.

While I'm not a fan of Apple or their products, I am quite proud of Apple for standing their ground. Most companies wouldn't fight for their customers nearly as hard as Apple is.

 

[heliomphalodon]

Apple talks a good game when it comes to encryption and protecting the privacy and data security of their customers - and I'm behind them 100% on this. But... if Apple didn't have its own back door into the iPhone, the FBI's demand would never even have come up. "What back door?" you ask. The back door that allows Apple itself to install a new version of iOS on the iPhone without the user's consent. If Apple were truly concerned with its users rather than its bottom line, it would close this back door once and for all and thereby put itself (and its customers) permanently beyond the reach of law enforcement hacking, however well-intentioned it claims to be.
As for the whole political/PR kerfuffle around the All Writs Act, the decisions of the courts, the demands from law enforcement and the pushback from Apple, the inconvenient truth is that there is no middle ground, and hence no possibility of compromise. Either the encryption is unbreakable, or it isn't. It would be wonderful if it were possible to grant access to law enforcement on a one-off basis when they have the proper warrants and act within the limits defined by the Constitution - but it just isn't. If the LEOs can get in, so can the bad guys. I can understand the government's desire that "thou shalt have no secret that we cannot reveal" but that's just too bad for them. They complain that they will be hampered in their investigations and that crimes will go unsolved. Well, I'm sure they could get a lot more convictions in the absence of the 5th Amendment, or if they could forget about that pesky exclusionary rule. But we, the people, have declined to remove these limits on their investigative powers.
Bottom line - all governments, by their very nature, seek control. Encryption reduces that control, so governments oppose it. So be it. This is a battle they cannot win, so they should give up their crusade against encryption and privacy and instead focus on how to best do their jobs in the modern world.

 

[lorfa]

Overturn ruling Against Unlocking.. ugh, too many negatives!

 

[Achoo22]

This is such a joke. The government owns your phone via carriers, regardless of what you do or don't do.

 

[krr711]

Why aren't the liberals telling the democratic party they have extended their reach? If we mention some minority group it is forbidden but this affects every human on the planet. Where do the politicians stand?

 

[abbadon_34]

Why are Republicans (Cruz and Paul) the only ones in the government that respresent the Libertarian view, and respect privacy over big government? Is it that none of the voters care or understand enough about these issues to make them a priority?

 

[Avus]

I think this is the time both DoJ and FBI wish they are in China... If this happen in China, the PLA are already storm in Apple HQ and get whatever tech and people they need.

 

[house70]

Why aren't the liberals telling the democratic party they have extended their reach? If we mention some minority group it is forbidden but this affects every human on the planet. Where do the politicians stand?

Sorry for busting your bubble, but the current Republican leading candidate has a similar position with the one you put only on Democrats, going as far as to boycott Apple until it gives in. I guess the issue crosses party lines but a huge margin. Given Trump's popularity, I suspect he's not the only Republican to think like that.

I have been boycotting Apple for a long time, but for different reasons; on this issue, I stand with them.

 

[FITCamaro]

Apple talks a good game when it comes to encryption and protecting the privacy and data security of their customers - and I'm behind them 100% on this. But... if Apple didn't have its own back door into the iPhone, the FBI's demand would never even have come up. "What back door?" you ask. The back door that allows Apple itself to install a new version of iOS on the iPhone without the user's consent.

Installing a new version of the OS would probably erase the encrypted data.

Furthermore, Apple currently does not have such a way of doing this. What the FBI is asking Apple to do, is develop a way to downgrade the OS forcibly. Because currently the device has to be unlocked in order to upgrade or downgrade the device.

 

[heliomphalodon]

@FITCamaro, you're mistaken. Read Apple's response to the court order and you'll find that a new, crippled version of iOS is exactly what would be required.

 

[hitman400]

@FITCamaro, you're mistaken. Read Apple's response to the court order and you'll find that a new, crippled version of iOS is exactly what would be required.

Well, what the FBI wanted FIRST was a new iOS version that is crippled. Then later on, they changed their discussions to downgrading phones to iOS7 because it has less encryption. iOS7 is more crippled than 9 simply because of the fact that it has less encryption, therefore, you are both right.

 

[Christopher1]

This goes far beyond one phone, anyone who can't see that is blind.

Blind, brainwashed or corrupt. Take your pick. I lean to the latter two in those three.

 

[heliomphalodon]

@hitman400, I admit that I have not kept up with this over the last few days, so I'm unaware of any retreat on the part of the FBI. Still, I contend that the Apple back door remains - to wit: Apple can install a new version of iOS on an iPhone without the consent of the customer, and without erasing the contents of the targeted device.

 

[Fueledbygame]

Can't Apple just say it isn't possible, end of story?

 

[heliomphalodon]

Having now read the DOJ's latest salvo against Apple, I see nothing to indicate that the government is willing to retreat, i.e. alter its demand and request that Apple merely install an earlier version of iOS as suggested by @hitman400. On the contrary, the federales are doubling down and entrenching their original position. Sorry to say (because I believe in privacy and data security over law enforcement access) I now believe that Apple will lose this fight and will be forced to create an instrument for the DOJ to use to break into the subject iPhone.
I hope that Apple's response is a new version of iOS that closes all back doors, even theirs, thereby eliminating this sort of coercion once and for all. We'll soon see where Apple really stands.

 

[heliomphalodon]

Can't Apple just say it isn't possible, end of story?

Nope, Apple has already admitted that it is in fact possible, albeit insane.