Reuters reports that both Republican and Democratic party members of the House Judiciary Committee support Apple’s view that Congress, not the courts, should decide the FBI case – and plan to file a legal brief to say so. The committee is responsible for overseeing the administration of justice within federal courts, and most of its members have a legal background.
Members of the House Judiciary Committee are considering filing a “friend of the court” brief in Apple’s encryption dispute with the U.S. government to argue that the case should be decided by Congress and not the courts, five sources familiar with the matter said […]
They said the brief would come from individual committee members of both Republican and Democratic parties but not the judiciary committee itself. Reuters could not determine which members were likely to be included …
One of Apple’s lead lawyers has previously argued that “the government is really seeking to push the courts to do what they haven’t been able to persuade Congress to do” and that it should be Congress that makes the decision on whether or not it is right to compel the company to compromise the security of its operating system.
Any filing would not be made before today’s panel hearing where FBI director James Comey and Apple general counsel Bruce Sewell will face off. Reuters says it is possible that the committee members may choose to wait until after Apple’s appeal has been heard.
The case took an interesting twist yesterday when a New York judge found in favour of Apple in an unrelated but near-identical case. There too the government was trying to use the All Writs Act to force Apple to break into an iPhone, the judge ruling that the government had “failed to establish […] that the AWA permits the relief it seeks.”
Apple has stated that it is “confident” the San Bernardino court would pay close attention to this ruling.
Photo: ABC News
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
I have been busy writing to my elected officials exactly this point – as well as the fact that I stand for privacy in my devices. Add in all the recent “breaches” in the government systems and it makes a compelling argument that if they can’t safeguard the information that I have to file, what trust do I have in their ability to open my encrypted personal devices?
Same here. One of my senators is up for reelection this year and looks like her opponent will be our governor. I’ve written them both and offered to meet with them (I am in Software & Security) to share my views and concerns.
In reading about the ruling handed down yesterday from Judge Orenstein n NY, in a court challenge to get Apple to unlock an iPhone is a court case, judge Orenstein separately finds fault with the government’s application on the ground that the government has failed to prove that it truly has to have Apple’s help in order to bypass the passcode in this case. And why did he think this? That’s rather interesting.
First, Judge Orenstein emphasized that the government had represented at one point in this litigation that it lacked the tools to circumvent the passcode, but that in a separate case two months earlier a witness had testified that DHS had acquired some type of brute-force tool that might actually do the trick in such cases. Apparently the judge later asked, at oral argument, about this seeming discrepancy, and was told that the DHS tool was not universally applicable, and in any event ran a serious risk of triggering the loss of data on the phone. Rather than accept that answer, however, Judge Orenstein concluded that “the government has made so many conflicting statements in the two cases as to render any single one of them unreliable.”
The complete article can be read at https://lawfareblog.com/apple-v-fbi-primer-2-judge-orensteins-ruling-queens-meth-case
Let’s hope Congress wants to take this on and not depend on the AWA from the late 1700s.
Interesting – thanks for sharing it.
Apple states in the other case too that there’s been ‘no evidence’ of asking for help from other government agencies. Combined with what this judge in this case says it does rather suggests that a tool exists by DHS / NSA!
Im certain options do exist – it’s not possible that this is the FIRST iphone to come across this issue. And it fits with what cook says – that there would have been options had they not gone rushing to the judge and public.
Im certain the DHS/NSA have options – probably using zero-day exploits – to get into iOS devices. I mean dont tell me the NSA cant turn a microphone or get a tracker on to a known terrorists abroad or get data off a phone. They probably even have their own versions of ‘GovtOS’ having obtained a copy of Apple’s security certificate. It’s just that the FBI does not have routine access to these.
I still don’t understand what’s so big deal in unlocking one iPhone. Apple can demand custody of controversial iPhone, unlock it in its premises, handover the data to FBI and then destroy the backdoor and iPhone as well. Case Closed. FBI will be happy with the data, Apple will be happy for not disclosing the backdoor, and users will be happy that Apple cares for their privacy.
Simple !
http://viptest.9to5mac.com/2016/02/26/fbi-apple-iphone-precedent-poll-candidates/
I know that fact that if Apple unlocks one iPhone, FBI would demand for others as well in future. But if you consider the other side of the story, they are demanding to unlock iPhone of criminals. They aren’t asking to unlock each and every iPhone Apple has ever produced.
The victims should get the justice, don’t you think so? Every problem has some or the other solution. Bluntly denying to unlock isn’t a solution.
When you make something, it is your responsibility to make sure that it is beneficial to the people. iPhone is certainly beneficial in normal use, but actually, these are the times when Apple should take the initiative and try to deliver justice to the victims.
Sorry to keep replying with links, but saves time :-) http://viptest.9to5mac.com/2015/11/17/opinion-apple-encryption/
Add to the links that Ben is supplying the fact that the minute Apple does this for the US Government, other foreign governments will be demanding the same thing and some of those countries – potentially – will not just be unlocking the phones of “criminals” but other types of citizens: dissidents or, potentially, phone of diplomats that these countries have “acquired” through shady means.
As many have said before – it’s a very ice-coated slope that we are being pushed towards – and you can’t put the genie back in the bottle once you’ve let him out.
Think Globally / Act Locally!
I don’t know if this has been covered in the replies to your (absurd) comment, but you also have to look at the legal system. When dealing with cyber security, when you submit digital evidence into the court, you have to prove that the data in question was not tampered with. If Apple unlocks the phone, the program code used to help unlock the phone would have to be submitted into evidence so it could be verified that the newly introduced code did not tamper with the data on the phone. Once that happens, that code can be part of public record, meaning that anyone would have access to the code.
No. Just no. Bad.
Ben, I read the article in the link you gave. I never said to make a backdoor, I just pointed a solution to the problem. FBI can demand as many iPhone as they need to get unlocked from Apple. But they shouldn’t be getting the backdoor in their hands. Every time they need to unlock an iPhone, they’ll have to hand it over to Apple, and they will unlock it, extract the data ( Just the data not the iPhone) and hand it over to FBI. BACKDOOR AND IPHONE REMAINS WITH APPLE FOREVER.
This will also create some kind of fear in minds of terrorists. As of now, they are confident, because FBI cannot unlock the data and Apple will never do it. They use this technology for killing.
just for example, almost everyone here would have a tonne of their personal, financial, and professional data on the iPhone. Just assume, how much communication and data would be stored on a terrorists iPhone? They won’t use public booth to talk to their leaders, they will obviously use encrypted ways.
If you create a lock, it’s your responsibility to take care of they keys. You can’t simply back-off saying that our devices can’t be unlocked at all, even if government ask to do.
But it won’t …
I should stop wasting my keyboards !
Apple isn’t saying you can’t unlock the door, or that no one can ever unlock it. It is saying THEY can’t. You still can, you can give a key to your friends, what have you. So the maker of the lock on my door should be forced to come break my door lock?
> . FBI can demand as many iPhone as they need to get unlocked from Apple. But they shouldn’t be getting the backdoor in their hands. Every time they need to unlock an iPhone, they’ll have to hand it over to Apple, and they will unlock it, extract the data ( Just the data not the iPhone) and hand it over to FBI. BACKDOOR AND IPHONE REMAINS WITH APPLE FOREVER.
You’re missing the vital part of the legal process, the chain of custody.
1. That will require all of the employees involved here to testify in courts for the FBI on how the data was extracted and how the chain of custody was maintained. That places an unreasonable burden on Apple and in fact, is clearly outlawed by the constitution. That’s why FBI wants Apple to bypass this and to weaken the security, so that FBI is the one brute-forcing it and the one that’s maintaining the chain of custody. The FBI knows that Apple cannot be forced to handle this part for them.
2. Apple cannot UNLOCK any devices starting with iOS 8 and iPhone 5S or above, nor can they unlock it without knowing the passcode. They do not process any capability to decrypt iPhones 5S or above, period.
> This will also create some kind of fear in minds of terrorists. As of now, they are confident, because FBI cannot unlock the data and Apple will never do it. They use this technology for killing.
That’s not true and you know it.
1. The terrorist in this case intentionally destroyed his personal phone that may contain any such data and the iPhone wasn’t destroyed because it was issued by the county, they own the iPhone and can monitor it. That’s why the terrorist didn’t destroy the iPhone
2. Any smart terrorist would be using their own encryption tools on top of the platform. In other words,
3. Unlocking the iPhone DOES NOT automatically decrypt the data in the apps that uses their own encryption tools. The only people that will be at harm with such a backdoor are the law-abiding citizens, it DOES not hinder the terrorism in any ways. ISIS for an example already sent out a guideline a few years ago on how to protect themselves with certain apps that uses encryption keys of their own.
> If you create a lock, it’s your responsibility to take care of they keys. You can’t simply back-off saying that our devices can’t be unlocked at all, even if government ask to do.
First of all, Apple is not the gatekeeper of keys, that’s precisely the point here. Apple does not have the key to the iPhones. Encryption doesn’t work like a lock, it’s much stronger than that. A lock can be brute-forced to be broken but encryption can’t be broken like this, the only way in is by guessing the key design itself.
In addition, in USA, you have the constitution right, the 5th amendment to not self-incriminate yourself. A password (the key) can only exist in your mind, therefore the government has no authority to take it from there. However, that dose not mean you do not go to jail, you can be kept in contempt of the court and jailed until you give up the key.
However, Apple does not have the key, therefore, they cannot be compelled to give it up.
Thanks man for such a detailed answer, rather then posting links like Ben ! Just kidding.
You have certainly convinced me up to 90%, but somewhere I feel that Apple is not above the law.
“The only people that will be at harm with such a backdoor are the law-abiding citizens,”
Why would I care if FBI is monitoring my iPhone, if I am not doing anything illegal. Frankly speaking, all they will find is bunch of jokes and maybe some porn, that’s it.
that’s my belief.
Kunal – maybe that is all they would find on your phone. But it isn’t all they would find on mine. And it isn’t the government I am concerned with. It is once that tool is created, it has the potential to make it to the wild. Where any government, friend or foe, could have access to it. Where any individual, friend or foe, could gain access to it.
And one Apple is compelled to do this for the US government, they will be compelled to do so by the Russian government, the Chinese government, etc. see what I mean?
And again, that may be all they will find on your phone, but on mine they will find my location history, have access to the location of my children, health information, banking information, etc.
So, yes, I have nothing to hide because I am not doing anything wrong. At the same time, I have everything to hide in the name of protecting my information.
Kunal Barcha – “Why would I care if FBI is monitoring my iPhone, if I am not doing anything illegal.”
That is the single most dangerous sentence to American freedom and privacy, period.
Offer $1 million dollar reward for the code to crack an iPhone and this story will go away in a week.
I think Apple is greedy, irresponsible and due to their wealth they think they are above the law.
But in a democracy then law makers can legitimately decide – and they can legitimately move to bring it to congress.
That’s all correct.
The issue would then be whether Apple would still consider themselves to be above the law.
John, would you still feel that way if the FBI asked Kwikset, a deadbolt lock manufacturer, to provide the FBI with a master key that can unlock ANY door in the US that uses a Kwikset lock? Would you support the FBI in their request in the name of “national security” or would you stand by Kwikset if they said they would not provide such a key? This is basically the same thing: The FBI wants a “master key” to access any “door” (iPhone) at their discretion, in the name of “national security.”
Furthermore, if Kwikset was forced by the courts to provide a master key, how long would it take for all other deadbolt manufacturers to be required to provide such a key? Your home wouldn’t feel quite as safe and secure if you knew the government had a key to your front door, would it?
Your phone probably contains credit card information, access to email, website passwords, family photos, and your web browsing history. Would you voluntarily hand that over to anyone that asked, in the name of “national security”? Or to put it another way, would you allow any FBI agent into your home without warrant or cause, just to poke around?
#StandWithApple @Microsoft @Google @Twitter @Yahoo @WhatsApp @RepTedLieu on privacy. Add your name >>> http://1.usa.gov/1R9A4cM