Following the revelation that Apple’s top lawyer Bruce Sewell will testify before Congress this coming week over encryption, another attorney for the company has sat down with CNN to discuss the ongoing case. In the interview, current Apple representative and former United States solicitor general Ted Olson discussed how what the government is asking Apple to do is “limitless.”
Olson explained that if the tool that the government wants is created, any judge anywhere could essentially order to listen to any customer’s conversation, track location, and much more. The lawyer likened it to a Orwellian “big brother” type society.
When pressed about how Apple could potentially help fight terrorism by creating a tool to access locked devices, Olson explained that while Apple will help the government defeat terrorism in every way that it can, it can’t be done by breaking the Constitution. It was reported earlier this week that Apple plans to argue that the digital signature it uses to validate code is protected by the First Amendment as free speech.
Olson also said, however, that if the United States Supreme Court should rule in favor of court’s request to unlock the device he can’t imagine a situation in which Apple would defy a ruling from the Supreme Court, implying that Apple will comply if ordered to do so by the higher court. Olson added that he doesn’t see that happening though, as he and Apple are very confident in their argument.
You can watch the interview below:
Apple’s battle with the FBI over national security versus user privacy began last week and has since become one of the biggest and most complex stories in tech and politics. You can view all of our extensive coverage at the links below:
- U.S. judge orders Apple to help FBI access data on San Bernardino gunman’s iPhone 5c
- Apple publishes letter responding to FBI iPhone unlock demand: ‘an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers’
- Google CEO Pichai appears to side with Apple in series of vague tweets on FBI encryption battle
- Security firm shows how Apple could bypass iPhone security to comply with FBI request
- Opinion: How likely is Apple to succeed in resisting the FBI court order?
- Should Apple comply with FBI request to bypass San Bernardino gunman’s iPhone? [Poll]
- Civil rights groups and tech companies express support for Apple’s stand against the FBI
- Opinion: Why an iPhone master key is better than a backdoor, but still too dangerous
- Petition urges White House to support Apple in blocking government access to locked iPhones
- Senate Intelligence Committee considering bill to penalize companies refusing to decrypt user device
- Report: Apple to get more time to formally respond to government’s request for access to locked iPhone
- Apple/FBI fight looks destined to go all the way to the Supreme Court as more background is revealed
- Department of Justice files motion to force Apple to comply with FBI iPhone backdoor request
- Apple implies FBI screwup: iPhone Apple ID password changed in govt possession, backdoor unnecessary
- FBI explains why it changed Apple ID password in iPhone unlock case, retrieved iCloud backups up to October 19 but wants more
- San Bernardino victims divided on iPhone issue as FBI claims not trying to set a precedent
- Apple/FBI: Tim Cook sends memo to employees, wants government to drop All Writs Act demands, posts customer FAQ
- Edward Snowden describes how the FBI could physically extract passcode from iPhone chip without Apple’s help
- Mark Zuckerberg sides w/ Apple in encryption battle as poll suggests public supports FBI
- Report says DOJ seeking data from ‘about’ 12 other iPhones as Bill Gates sides with FBI
- Report: Apple to argue that encryption battle with FBI should be decided by Congress
- Bloomberg: Apple will argue that the digital signature it uses to validate code is protected as free speech
- Tim Cook says tool to unlock iPhone is the ‘software equivalent of cancer’ in new interview
- Apple working on stronger iCloud backup encryption and iPhone security to counter FBI unlock requests
- Apple’s top lawyer Bruce Sewell to testify before Congress over encryption next week
- Apple officially responds to court request to comply with FBI in San Bernardino iPhone case
- Report: Google, Twitter, Facebook, & Microsoft to file court motions officially supporting Apple in FBI fight
- FBI director admits under oath that iPhone case would set a precedent; public & Republican candidates still on FBI side
- San Bernardino police chief takes sides in Apple’s encryption battle with the FBI
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Apple’s claim: “if the tool that the government wants is created, any judge anywhere could essentially order to listen to any customer’s conversation, track location, and much more.”
Clearly ridiculous.
The court court requires software which only works if the phone is in physical possession of the FBI and Apple.
Claiming that it could allow law enforcement to do something to my phone – which is not in their possession – is just not true.
As with their ludicrous claim that the court order is equivalent to forcing them to execute people – Apple clearly getting desperate.
Ok suppose they do get your phone via a search warrant. Now they can do whatever they want. Still feeling safe?
You clearly don’t understand the argument.
Apple’s brief is very clearly argued if you care to read it.
Apple are being ordered to ‘create’ to hacking tool. This is unprecedented, none of the cases cited in the FBI brief amount to this.
Since this case would set a precedent that is a big step, future orders could be issued to compel Apple to create other hacking tools, so if John Smith is a ‘suspect’ they could potentially be ordered to create a hacking tool that would target John Smith’s phone. Hacking tools demanded in future cases do not necessarily require that the government have physical possession of a device or that that the tool only work with one device.
Apple draws the line at ‘create’. It is happy to hand over all the data it has access to, but it will not ‘create’ a hacking tool. The demand is burdensome and unconstitutional.
Man,
Special services have enough tools to track, to get into, to monitor or to get access to your email based on court’s decision.
In this exact case, the services would like to get “special software” which will allow them to access to ANY Apple’s device. Of course, they’ll tell you that “this is specific case”, “we’ll be using it based on court’s or prosecutor’s permission” but everybody knows already that NOBODY can restrict it for them when the tool already in their hands.
So. here’s Apple fights for own “unique factor” — guarantee of privacy.
I think they have more other evidences to prove shooter’s fault and to know his mates in this bloody case. But not so much people asks themselves why this case is more important than others where iPhone was a “key-evidence”.
Probably, I’m “one more stupid russian” :) but I’m really can’t understand why here’s so many noise and why this case is so special. What I think is that “Big Brother wants more tools and ways to control Small Brothers”.
What I have to explain. I can’t understand why so many noise from FBI/NSA/CIA etc special services’ side. Meanwhile, Apple fights for REAL THING,
That’s not at all what they are saying… it’s not the tool itself that gives them the added capability it’s the precedent set by the order.
You’re misinformed and unimaginative.
This is the biggest and most important story in tech not only of today, but of all time. What happens here will forever shape not only technology, but also many aspects of society globally for the foreseeable future. The media is hiding the scope of these issues and the general American population has no clue.
Please –Don’t Feed The Troll (John Smith) — It will keep the board clearer for rational discussions, not wasting the space for the troll.
John Smith is a troll because he has a different opinion to you? Have you not moved on from the “call everyone a troll who we don’t agree with because we can’t be bothered to get into an argument” stage yet?
I’m just wondering if this so-called GovOS is something they think they can install AFTER they acquire the phone in question or is do they want this as the new, replacement OS. The reason is that if they came up with a GovOS to be installed after the fact, how could they install it without getting access to the user’s password to log in?
The idea of this tool is that it would bypass any need for a passcode, and allow the Government to do as they please with the device. Once created it would be a tool in existence, and if it exists there is someone, somewhere, who would be able to recreate it and exploit it.
The government isn’t in control of everything we do. They can’t just have our personal data because they want it.
Also consider the international impact it could have. The US isn’t the only place iPhones are used/sold, so once other countries know the tool is there, what’s to stop them from asking for it?
at first I though there was Trump at the top picture
I’m have been an apple investor. Almost sold numerous times. I didn’t think the could divest secured email and phones away from the likes of Microsoft and blackberry. They have spent billions. And now because San Bernadino didn’t understand what they were doing the government is choosing to make apple look like crooks. FBI should have stood up in public, said we screwed this up can we get help, instead they chose the ugly route
Considering this guys wife died on American 11 on September 11th, it’s safe to say he’s not a stool pigeon for the government.