Skip to main content

Senate Intelligence Committee considering bill to penalize companies refusing to decrypt user devices

tim-cook

Following Apple’s refusal to unlock an iPhone 5c used by one of the San Bernardino gunmen, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, a Republican out of North Carolina, plans to propose a new bill that would impose criminal penalties on companies that don’t comply with those types of orders. Citing people familiar with the matter, the report says that Burr’s plan isn’t finalized yet and that it’s unclear how many other lawmakers support the idea.

Apple on Tuesday was ordered by a U.S. magistrate judge to give the FBI access to a passcode-locked iPhone 5c used by one of the San Bernardino gunmen. CEO Tim Cook then argued in an open-letter posted on Apple’s that the company would not comply with the order, saying it doesn’t want to create such a dangerous tool.

While the bill is likely far off from being officially voted on, it signals just how monumental this issue has become in both Silicon Valley and Washington D.C. The bill, the report claims, could be written as a modification to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which was originally imposed in 1994. This law suggests that companies develop their communication systems so that law enforcement agencies are able to gain access with a proper court order.

Burr has long been a proponent of forcing technology companies to work more closely with government agencies when it comes to accessing data on locked devices. He worked with Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, in December to propose a bill that would require social media companies to report terrorist activity. That bill, however, has yet to advance. In New York, a bill has been proposed that would force companies to give the government access to user devices, or else face punishment.

On the other side of the aisle, Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives’ Intelligence Committee, is more open when it comes to the issue. He suggests that “the court’s decision will likely accelerate our consideration of how to weigh the competing privacy, security and competitiveness issues,” noting that a legislative approach to the issue is “neither feasible or even desirable” (via Reuters).

The Reuters report also notes that the House Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing on encryption on March 1st and has invited Apple to attend. That hearing won’t be the first tim Apple has met with the U.S. government on encryption. Meanwhile, a new petition is urging the White House to back Apple in the case.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. Thomas Marble Peak - 8 years ago

    Has the U,S, government lost its mind? There is a White House petition that has been started over at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/apple-privacy-petition to show your support of Apple’s stance on your privacy.

    • Reg Guy (@mactoid) - 8 years ago

      The Senate is currently controlled by the GOP…just another way of saying that it has, in fact, lost its mind (and ethics, and moral responsibility, and support of the US constitution, among other things). God help us all….

      • srgmac - 8 years ago

        Good point. Bernie for President for real — time to put this nonsense to bed. You know either him or Hillary would veto any such bill WITH THE QUICKNESS if it ever succeeded. Just something to think about this year when you cast your vote…Do you want someone in office who would do this?

      • vreedy - 8 years ago

        Let’s don’t be obtuse in believing this is a GOP only issue. There will be plenty on both sides that will trumpet this garbage. Just because d!ckhead Trump is spouting off and this idiot is introducing legislation doesn’t mean it’s strictly a partly line issue. Hillary or Bernie may come out against this, but that will be because someone on the other side is for it. Do not overestimate the lust for votes. The government wants this backdoor, elephants and donkeys alike.

      • standardpull - 8 years ago

        So much for the claim that congress hates regulations. Now they want to regulate my ability to encrypt private data.

        Fire the lot of them. They are thoughtless, stupid, lazy, ineffective, corrupt, self-serving, and a waste of taxpayer money. Particularly this tool from North Carolina.

      • Yeah, I’m sure if the Democrats controlled the Senate, ALL of life’s problems would just up and vanish … like this one. Good God man, get a grip. This isn’t a partisan issue…until some partisan hack like you makes it one.

      • paulywalnuts23 - 8 years ago

        It is this a GOP issue only, why hasn’t the President come out and said he was against it. Instead his press secretary has come out and defended the Feds, and if Hilary is elected I am sure she will take the same stance and side with the FEDs. This is a problem with the entire government not just the GOP.

      • paulywalnuts23 - 8 years ago

        Sorry that should have been, “If this is”.

      • vreedy - 8 years ago

        Update from another story, Obama’s Justice Dept has filed against Apple too.

  2. applegetridofsimandjack - 8 years ago

    US gouvernement can bįtch and cry all they like, Apple won’t budge, and rightly so.

    I think Apple would rather go bankrupt and vanish than creating a backdoor allowing anyone to access someone else’s information and data.

    • vreedy - 8 years ago

      They will cry all they like, and Apple will likely have to concede at some point. I hope I am wrong.

  3. dcj001 - 8 years ago

    “impose criminal penalties on company’s ”

    Aostrophe’s should never be used to pluralize noun’s, including acronym’s, such as HDD’s or SSD’s.

  4. Clark Brown - 8 years ago

    The US Government is no longer a government “of the people, by the people and for the people”. This is one more action that’s proof of that.

    • Jake Becker - 8 years ago

      Government isn’t that by default. People want to be controlled – here it comes, right up the corn hole.

      • vreedy - 8 years ago

        Speak for yourself. Sheep and idiots want to be controlled.

  5. Tony Edwards - 8 years ago

    If you can’t win cheat (or legislate) your way to victory I am behind apple 100% on this one

  6. Carlos Shabo - 8 years ago

    sooooo they want to pass a bill because they arent getting what they want? This is a VERY slippery slope. next thing you know, they will pass a bill where you have to forfeit 40% of your paycheck……nevermind.

  7. gjconstructs - 8 years ago

    All the senators and lawmakers have to be the first of have their phones unlocked and scrutinized. The public needs to know that they are represented by law abiding representatives.

  8. icrew - 8 years ago

    How utterly pointless and needlessly punitive. Here’s why:

    For me, the most important part of this is the part of Tim Cook’s statement that reads “Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.”

    Even if tons of tools weren’t already available, the mathematical/computer science theory and code to write strong encryption tools is widely known around the world and it’s really pretty simple (taught in most introductory CS theory classes). In fact, ISIS has reportedly already done so. See http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/security-software/jon-martindale/daesh-has-its-own-encrypted-chat-app/

    So forcing Apple and other manufacturers to artificially weaken it won’t help us catch the real “bad guys,” it’ll just reduce the level of privacy for all of us ordinary folks.

    • patthecarnut - 8 years ago

      “Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.” Interesting point. I wonder how many people have this stance that are pro gun control, because the same defense is being used against them. I’m not sure if Tim Cook has made a public stance on gun control, but if he is pro gun control, this defence is hypocritical. Funny how that works when it’s you who is being attacked. And I’m on his side of this. This government has lost it’s mind and we will soon be a society of minimum wage earners and small sector businesses paying 90% of the taxes because all the big guys with the higher paying jobs will be run out of the country.

  9. What the FBI wants does not rise to the level of vital necessity. They are suspecting a work phone (that he did not destroy) might lead to information. The FBI is on a fishing exhibition. I would not let this get even started — well maybe if the FBI knew there was a nuclear detonation code in his phone. The government should back off.

  10. AeronPeryton - 8 years ago

    Apple complies with every request to decrypt a device (within their power to do so), so far as I know. Apple’s stance is that they will not alter their software or hardware to make it easier to crack. Either at will or remotely or en masse. So… I fail to see how this bill would solve their problems or affect the current stand off.

  11. 89p13 - 8 years ago

    Just a note to all the US of A citizens on this site who support Apples stand – YOU ELECT THESE CLOWNS.

    So, how are they at representing you now? Get involved and make your voice heard. We are being led off a very steep cliff by these morons if this passes.

  12. Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

    Wasn’t Forrest Gump from the South too?
    Stupid is as Stupid Does.

  13. carpetbomberz - 8 years ago

    Maybe the fine should be just paying their share of Corporate Taxes?

    • 89p13 - 8 years ago

      Maybe the “All Knowing Government” should change the laws to prevent tax sheltering?

      Oh, wait, that would cost all the “fat cats” that support the PACs and SuperPACs that support these Governing Fools – and they won’t bite the hands that keep them in office!

      Face it — Apple and so many other US multi-national companies play by the rules as they exist when it comes to taxes.

      And – please – stay on topic and quit sniping when your argument is so off topic.

    • vreedy - 8 years ago

      You already pay their corporate taxes.

  14. pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

    whether we agree or not, apple is now breaking the law…
    There is no law that states your privacy is 100% protected … when ordered, especially from the courts, you must comply – which is law… otherwise you are restricting the course of justice, which could result in a prison sentence…

    The courts are not ordering apple to unlock all phones, or give access to all phones, or access a random innocent phone — they are asking to access a phone from a terrorist attack…

    plus… apple originally stated that it was impossible to do…now it is possible…
    So we are now having to trust that apple arent hiding anything — the fact that the FBI are finding it impossible gain access BUT apple have stated they can means Apple could have accessed our data in the past and could still be doing so — they are probably not, but how do we know???

    • Jake Becker - 8 years ago

      I hope Apple breaks every law that doesn’t personally violate another person or their property.

    • flaviosuave - 8 years ago

      Apple is not “now breaking the law,” they are challenging a court order. This will likely get appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court rules against Apple, and they still refuse to comply with the order, then they will be breaking the law.

    • tincan2012 - 8 years ago

      “..Apple could have accessed our data in the past and could still be doing so — they are probably not, but how do we know???”

      Pretty sure Apple did not access your data. I Googled it. /s

    • They haven’t broken the law. A judge issued an order, apple will file a motion opposing it, if the judge doesn’t rule in Apple’s failure they will appeal, and if the appeal is in the government’s side, apple will then appeal to the supreme court, so there’s a while for this to play out.

      Also, the government has access to the phone, they just can’t unlock it. If a safe company builds a safe with no secondary opening mechanism and for some reason the government can’t crack the safe, should the safe company then be forced to allocate man power and resources to develop a new way to unlock the safe and unlock it for the government? Obviously in my analogy you have to assume that if the government keeps trying the contents within the safe will be destroyed and that the government can’t crack the safe.

      My point is, the judge wants to compel Apple to not to give them the key, but to invent a key and force them to use man power to develop this new key.

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        If you have a means to access a piece of evidence, and you actively choose not to help the authorities – this is classed as a criminal offence because you are obstructing the course of justice — you are essentially withholding evidence crucial to the investigation…

        They have the phone – but they dont have access to the phone content — Apple can give them that access if they wish to.

        And yes – those who make safes are often called on for their expertise … often those who create something can best figure out how to break in or take it apart… the FBI often call upon criminals to assist in cracking a crime…

        Essentially Apple does not have to GIVE THEM a key — they just need to unlock the phone…they dont need to reveal any secrets.
        If this was for ALL phones, or just some petty crime, or for spying – then i would perfectly understand the reactions people give and would fully support Apple…
        BUT this is for ONE phone… and this particular phone belongs to a CRIMINAL who was part of a TERRORIST group who gave up ALL RIGHTS to privacy when he committed the crime.

        Although Apple is fighting the government about privacy – they are all supporting terrorists and criminals – they are giving criminals a more ‘secure’ means to commit their crimes.

        I would much prefer Apple maintaining strong security BUT also help catching the bad guys!!!

  15. 2is1toomany - 8 years ago

    So if you can’t get what you want, shake them down until they give in? Yay USA???

  16. srgmac - 8 years ago

    They can’t decrypt it, the FBI would still need to get it brute forced…This is spinning out of control and not many people know the facts. Most news outlets are portraying this like Apple can flip a few switches and get the data — that’s not how it works! Also, it appears that the forensic / hacker community has been able to brute force <=iOS 8.4.1 with some exploit that disables the wipe and disables the password timeout on devices with no secure enclave.
    Apple should once and for all hard code the timeouts and forced wipe into the secure enclave chip and then make it so the SE chip can NOT be re-programmed to alter these specific parameters under any circumstances, and set this as the default. That would make brute forcing any iOS device with an SE extremely unlikely.

    • 89p13 - 8 years ago

      I like that – You should work with Cook and Apple.

      • Charles S. Bach - 8 years ago

        There appears to be only one person in this chain who has actually read and understood the issue. The FBI has a court order. Apple may appeal it, but if it stands they must comply with the law. The order does NOT open and unlock all phones, nor does it give the government carte blanc. It is intended to give them access the the mobile communication device of a terrorist who committed a horrible crime. Fishing? I don’t think so. Reasonable search … it seems that way to me.

        I don’t want government monitoring what i do and be able to examine my personal business without a search warrant any more than others. But if they get the warrant (an order of the court) then I expect to obey the law.

      • vreedy - 8 years ago

        What the FBI wants is the firmware overwritten to disable the locks for failed code entries to let them brute force the device. Do you think that firmware will be deleted when they are done and have full access to that device?

  17. srgmac - 8 years ago

    The funniest thing here is that — the banks that nearly destroyed the economy — none of them did even one day behind bars. Not one. And they want to penalize Apple or anyone else for not doing the FBI’s job for them. How unbelievable. This is why we can not have a republican president…I’m sorry, but I’m convinced that Rubio, Cruz, and Bush would not think twice at having this bill be a law…They would talk about keeping us safe, yada yada. Trump, I don’t know, but he’s an idiot either way, plus he has tons of other problems…Please please if you care about this, take a look at Bernie Sanders. Bernie would NEVER let something like this be a law — NEVER…It would be vetoed within two seconds of arriving on his desk.

    • Marc Berning (@brsamuel) - 8 years ago

      Actually, Bernie, being a Socialist, would just nationalize the Apple.

      • charbroiled20s - 8 years ago

        Actually, no. Democratic Socialism is definitely nothing like Marxism. Damn near everyone on medicare and social security love those programs which at their are core socialist programs. Unsurprisingly one driving force for Bernie’s campaign platform has been to “sure-up” those programs so they remain solvent in the face of their coffers being filled with IOU’s from the government whores that stole the funds.. When you make inane statements you sound like an idiot.

    • vreedy - 8 years ago

      Trump has already said he would force Apple to comply.

  18. Rich Davis (@RichDavis9) - 8 years ago

    What’s hypocritical is that all of the government policy makers want the security for themselves, but they don’t want it for everyone else unless they can fleece wealthy companies. It’s an encryption tax. What will they think of next? Charge another tax for those that don’t have encryption?

  19. charismatron - 8 years ago

    All your phones are belong to us.

  20. Waynehead (@ctt1wbw) - 8 years ago

    This is called tyranny. An out of control federal government who penalizes outsiders like this.

  21. valanchan - 8 years ago

    The concentration on the iPhone itself seems odd.

    Is it really needed?

    Are the email addresses encrypted as well as the contents?
    The phone companies cannot determine the recipients of calls from that Sim?

  22. ateterine - 8 years ago

    There is a typo in the article headline – Hard to believe there is “intelligence” involved.

  23. paulfj - 8 years ago

    I’m a conservative living in NC who voted for Burr last time around. I promise that won’t happen again. Anyone who publicly supports this idiocy officially loses my support. I don’t care about the party affiliation.

  24. Derek Blackshire - 8 years ago

    “Comey’s longstanding opposition to Apple’s use of encryption in iPhone. He said over a year ago that Apple is putting people beyond the law.” I say that Apple is trying to keep the government within the Law unlike they have been acting in the past as was revealed in the Edward Snowden leaks and others have shown that they have very little interest in following the law that they are suppose to uphold. They like to paint Apple as the villain here when they waited for this case to come along so they can get the key that they have wanted and have gotten in the past. So after not setting a precedent they have several other phones lined up and waiting to use this one time no other key to be used for unlocking those as well. So who is it that is not being honest here?

Author

Avatar for Chance Miller Chance Miller

Chance is an editor for the entire 9to5 network and covers the latest Apple news for 9to5Mac.

Tips, questions, typos to chance@9to5mac.com