Update: Apple general counsel Bruce Sewell has said that the FBI’s latest filing is a “cheap shot” and notes that the tone of it “reads like an indictment.” Sewell went on to add that the FBI is “so desperate at this point that it has thrown all decorum to the wind.” Furthermore, the Apple executive said that the brief was meant on the FBI’s part to “vilify” Apple.
The Department of Justice has today filed its latest response to Apple in their fight over unlocking the iPhone 5c used by one of the San Bernardino gunmen. The filling comes a week after the two sides faced off before the House Judiciary Committee over the issue. In the filing, the Justice Department accuses Apple of deliberately increasing security to prevent it from being able to comply with governmental requests.
The FBI argues in the filing that its request is “narrow and targeted” and “invades no one’s privacy,” despite Apple continuously arguing the exact opposite. The government says that Apple has the capability to remove the technological barriers to access the data on the device in question “without undue burden.” From the filing (via CNBC):
“Here, Apple deliberately raised technological barriers that now stand between a lawful warrant and an iPhone containing evidence related to the terrorist mass murder of 14 Americans. Apple alone can remove those barriers so that the FBI can search the phone, and it can do so without undue burden.”
As it has done from the start of this case, the Department of Justice also argues that the request is “modest” as it applies to a single iPhone. Apple, on the other hand has said multiple times that once it creates the tool to access the information from the device, it will be out in the wild for anyone to use. Also, in addition to the San Bernardino request, the government is asking for data in at least 14 other cases around the country.
To put the request in perspective, the DOJ explains that since Apple grosses “hundreds of billions of dollars” it should not have a problem complying with the request:
“By Apple’s own reckoning, the corporation — which grosses hundreds of billions of dollars a year — would need to set aside as few of six of its 100,000 employees for as little as two weeks.”
In the past, Apple has implied that the FBI screwed up the process of obtaining iCloud backups, saying that it changed the Apple ID password shortly after it obtained possession. In today’s filing, however, the FBI says that the San Bernardino gunman disabled iCloud backups roughly six weeks before the attacks.
“The evidence on Farook’s iCloud account suggests that he had already changed his iCloud password himself on October 22, 2015—shortly after the last backup—and that the autobackup feature was disabled. A forced backup of Farook’s iPhone was never going to be successful, and the decision to obtain whatever iCloud evidence was immediately available via the password change was the reasoned decision of experienced FBI agents investigating a deadly terrorist conspiracy”
Finally, the filling accuses Apple’s responses of being “not only false, but also corrosive.” The Department of Justice implies that Apple is going against the “safeguards” of the country, which include the Fourth Amendment, the courts, laws, and branches of government:
“Apple’s rhetoric is not only false, but also corrosive of the very institutions that are best able to safeguard our liberty and our rights: the courts, the Fourth Amendment, longstanding precedent and venerable laws, and the democratically elected branches of government.”
You can view the full filling below:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
DOJ: Any private company should be forced to write software for us if we want to, even if it’s against their will.
Is that not tyranny?
+1
But, the request is modest, and its only for this one iPhone.
Lol.
The DOJ is inconsistent on what they say.
Didn’t they say they wanted access to 12 other iPhones?
try harder, FBI.
Dear DOJ,
You’re asking Apple to solve your problem for you. You’re telling them how to solve that problem, even though there are far simpler ways to solve that problem. Your solution solves a lot of other “problems” you have too, by creating new tools that do not currently exist. Tools that could be very useful to you. How about you stick to hacking the specific machine in your possession, instead of weakening the machine in everyone’s possession?
Drop the BS.
Its getting old.
For all the other iPhones which they want to access they will just copy-paste this one and change the phone’s owner’s name in the text. Then at one of these cases they will be ordered to explain how they got the data. If all this would happen behind closed doors, Apple could just as well invent the data themselves. Then some other government will do the same for all their cases. So how is this applicable to only a single iPhone? What did I miss? (/s)
I love how they ignore the fact that apple tried to help them in the first place.
They’re acting as if apple actually said no.
I’m actually sick of both sides at this point. However, the government statements are a special kind of FUD. Based 100% on manipulation of the public. Apple’s increase in security is part of a long roadmap to protect their customers (this increases the value position for its customers).
Additionally, this has precisely zero to do with how much money Apple has. The fact that they have employees to to specific jobs, not this stuff.
I’m a little shocked that they outright lied in that filing. Isn’t that a pretty heinous thing to do in this circumstance??
1) “an iPhone containing evidence related to the terrorist mass murder of 14 Americans” there is almost no reason to believe that there is any evidence on this device. 99% chance that there is nothing of any value.
2) “it applies to a single iPhone” it is well documented that they have multiple devices they wish Apple to unlock in addition to this one. JUST THIS ONCE! EXCEPT EVERY TIME WE FEEL LIKE IT AFTER THIS.
3) Because Apple is rich, it must not be burdensome for them to do this for us. Utterly false logic. A fixed amount of effort is still a fixed amount of effort, regardless of how rich someone is. I guess we should start exclusively using independently rich people for jury duty, since they’re rich, they clearly will have the time to do it. (their time is LESS valuable because they’re rich? wait…)
There are definitely some points that the FBI could use, but they’re totally not using them. They could lay out the specifics of how they will ensure that this software alteration will only be used on this one phone, such as letting Apple handle the extraction on site at the Apple facility, allowing Apple to retain control of the software. The fact that they’re not saying such a thing is a glaring omission, which is just as much an admission. They want Apple to hand the cracked device over to them to reverse engineer to their heart’s content.
This latest filing reminds me of Sheriff Bart from Blazing Saddles:
http://cdn.hark.com/swfs/player_fb.swf?pid=rhgjzmgcfw
#StandWithApple and others companies trying to protect your privacy. Encourage all companies to improve security. Let lawmakers know you won’t tolerate the actions of the DOJ. Please join me in signing the White House #FBIvsApple petition at http://1.usa.gov/1R9A4cM
I think the FBI are doing their job… well, trying to…
There is so much hate in America right now against the people who actually protect the country and even risk their lives — of course most of what the FBI do is secretive and so we don’t really know what dangers they have manage to prevent…
The average person wouldnt even be able to comprehend half of what the FBI do…
This article is written by the FBI?
Let’s not forget that The United States of America, Inc. exists. They’re a corporation loke anyone else, except way more power.
As Snowden gave the FBI the solution, what’s all the fuss about? The Feds should just hand the phones over to Booz & Allen.
“No one’s privacy????” That the biggest pile of bullsh*t I’ve heard.
DOJ is right about it’s request to unlock one iphone does not invade anyone’s privacy but it does opens door for invading everyone’s privacy/