A detailed behind-the-scenes look by Bloomberg at the showdown between Apple and the FBI details how it had been on the cards for years before the San Bernardino shootings. Among the details revealed are that Apple provided the FBI with early access to iOS 8 so that the agency could understand the impacts ahead of its introduction.
The government’s concern about Apple’s increasing use of strong encryption dates back to 2010, said one source.
Long before iOS 8 was launched, U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies had fretted about Apple’s encryption, according to a person familiar with the matter. In 2010, the company introduced the video-calling app FaceTime. It encrypted conversations between users. The following year, the iMessage texting application arrived; it, too, featured encryption. While neither of these developments caused a public stir, the U.S. government was now aware how much of a premium Apple put on privacy.
It was around this time, says the piece, that the FBI started pushing the White House to introduce new legislation which would guarantee law enforcement access to data on smartphones and other devices. These attempts were reportedly abandoned when the Snowden revelations changed the public mood …
Officials were close to an agreement on legislation to update communications and privacy laws in 2013, but the Snowden revelations blew up the deal, according to a former U.S. official. After that, there was never again a serious effort to pass the legislation, the official said.
The government had in any case had mixed views on the issue, with even the Defense Department said to be concerned that creating backdoors into encrypted devices would create vulnerabilities for its own secret operations.
When Apple moved to encrypting iPhones by default in iOS 8, it gave the FBI a heads-up, so that the agency would understand the implications.
Apple gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation early access to iOS 8 so it could study how the new system would change evidence-gathering techniques, according to people familiar with the software’s development. The agency quickly realized Apple had closed an important access point used for years by agents to collect information about criminal suspects. Many in the FBI were stunned. Suddenly, photos, text messages, notes and dozens of other sources of information stored on phones were off-limits.
But while the FBI was extremely unhappy about the change, Apple believed the government was on board. The reason? China had been demanding backdoor access to iPhones, and the White House strongly supported Apple in resisting these demands.
The lobbying worked and China backed off. But Apple took away the wrong impression. The White House hadn’t reached any conclusion when it came to what encryption meant for the needs of U.S. law enforcement agencies, one former official said.
The rest we know. In the wake of the San Bernardino shootings, Apple had been cooperating with the FBI in providing access to iCloud backups of the phone, and was left shocked when the agency secretly obtained a court order for access to the iPhone itself, and informed the press before it told Apple.
Timothy Edgar, the former director of privacy and civil liberties for the White House National Security Staff, said that the standoff comes down to one simple difference of opinion between lawyers and tech companies.
Lawyers think privacy is you can’t listen to my conversation without a warrant; technologists think privacy is you can’t listen to my conversation, period.
The next court hearing takes place tomorrow. This had originally been expected to be a purely legal argument, each side putting forward the reasons it believes the law is on its side, but the DOJ last week made a last-minute request for it to be changed to an evidentiary hearing. This means that each side will be able to put up witnesses to argue the broader case, rather than just arguing the legal case.
This rather brings to mind the old legal adage.
If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts.
The government seemingly believes the law is against it in this case.
The case won’t be decided tomorrow: whoever wins, the opposing side will appeal – likely all the way to the Supreme Court. Even if Apple loses there, it’s still no guarantee the FBI will get its way: it has been reported that Apple engineers may refuse to create the vulnerable version of iOS, perhaps even quitting their jobs.
Photo of Tim Cook: Time
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
“But while the FBI was extremely unhappy about the change, Apple believed the government was on board. The reason? China had been demanding backdoor access to iPhones, and the White House strongly supported Apple in resisting these demands.”
But, now that the Government wants unfettered access to be able to “brute force” a password – the shoe is on the other foot!
Trust my Government – About as far as I could throw the Capital Building!
Even after all the news, after Snowden stand and Greenblatt cashing in off it, less that half the US population thinks Apple is in the right here. The only cross section agreeing in a good majority and the nerds and geeks in the tech world. That is not that many people, the vast majority believe in this case Apple should help the FBI.
Well, most people still trust the news. My local ABC affiliate posted this today: “Apple vs the FBI in 2 Minutes” from CNN/Money. Read it and it doesn’t present the counter argument as to why this is bad. It also purposely leaves facts out, and keeping the “just one phone/one time” argument going. It also uses phrasing to illicit a negative feeling such as “Apple’s high powered attorneys”
If you’re confused about what Apple’s fight with the FBI is all about, here’s what you need to know.
1) The FBI is trying to get into an iPhone 5C used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook.
2) It can’t get in because of Farook’s iPhone permanently locks and wipes its memory after 10 incorrect passcode guesses.
It also has a time-delay feature that prevents people from entering more than a few wrong passcodes before locking them out.
3) The FBI wants Apple to create special software for Farook’s iPhone that will help bypass the phone’s security protocols.
The FBI can then try endless password combinations until it gets the right one. In effect, the FBI is doing the hacking, not Apple. But without Apple changing the locks, the FBI can’t proceed.
4) A judge in February ruled Apple must comply with the government’s request.
5) Apple has been fighting that order.
Its central argument: Removing the security protection in this case would create a “backdoor” that could potentially allow the government or hackers to break into similar iPhones.
It has legal arguments as well: It says there is no specific law supporting the government’s request; the government should not be able to compel a private company to alter its product; writing code is like speech, and so the request is a violation of Apple’s First Amendment rights.
6) The Department of Justice is fighting too.
Its argument: This is a single request for a single phone, and doesn’t not create a back door for bad actors, but rather a front door for law enforcement only when it has a warrant.
7) The fight has gotten increasingly nasty
Apple’s high-powered attorneys have called the FBI’s arguments “disturbing,” and the FBI has called Apple’s attempt to combat the judge’s order a “desperate” marketing ploy.
8) Most technology companies and the ACLU have sided with Apple.
Facebook, Google and Microsoft are among the companies that have filed briefs with the court showing support for Apple.
9) The case could go to the Supreme Court
The same judge that ruled against Apple is issuing another ruling on Tuesday. But the ruling won’t be final. Appeals can go to a district court, then a court of appeals, and finally the Supreme Court.
Ah, CNN. Yep, that’s one way of getting people to dislike Apple. A complete wrong thing to do though. Quite despicable.
Good grief, how stupid are the Feds anyway? It would seem they all have a single digit IQ over there. If they’ve been enjoying access to iPhones prior to iOS encryption, why the frick are there still terrorist attacks? They really need to put their thinking cap on: accessing iOS isn’t going to stop any terrible act from being executed. Which is bad enough, but creating a backdoor won’t change anything.
Unfortunately, that’s not the way lawmakers and nanny states operate…what exploitation is there to be had from doing something the easy way?
But – it might make their jobs easier.
Just Big Brother looking to get BIGGER!
Where’s the fun in that? It’s easy to do easier. Hard is where the joy is at. And it will give one gratification.
I believe that’s what Apple said recently.
Perhaps the Courts should take a look at this:
“New details of the Paris attacks carried out last November reveal that it was the consistent use of prepaid burner phones, not encryption, that helped keep the terrorists off the radar of the intelligence services.
As an article in The New York Times reports: “the three teams in Paris were comparatively disciplined. They used only new phones that they would then discard, including several activated minutes before the attacks, or phones seized from their victims.”
The article is at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/world/europe/a-view-of-isiss-evolution-in-new-details-of-paris-attacks.html
Nothing to do with encryption – how does that play, FBI?
Exactly! All the more reason for the SIM card to be made obsolete. Have it all in software, where the phone play, prepaid costs et cetera can be traced to a person, instead paying for a SIM card with cash at some obscure store.
The FBI’s reply:
“This just goes to show that we need real time access to ALL conversations taking place on all phones at all times. We would, of course, only use this power and information for good. And to ensure that we don’t abuse this power a secret court will be created to secretly monitor us. You, the public, will of course, not have any access to any records of this court because of security and national defense reasons. In fact, even discussing the existence of this secret court outside of this press release will be illegal. We will be monitoring all communications to see if the secret court is ever mentioned and assume that the people involved are potential radical terrorist.
If anyone is unhappy about this setup they are free to have a public discussion about it, as long as nothing is mentioned in public, since that is now illegal.
Have a nice day. We will be watching.”
I have to truly wonder about our government and some of the people in this country. Here is a heads up FBI, DOJ, and the government in general, we don’t trust you. You have lied and abused your power over and over again. So, no, we don’t trust you to have our best interest at heart. Which, is truly sad since I believe that many in the FBI and DOJ do have the public’s interest at heart. The bureaucrats running them … that is another story. And the politicians … BWAHAHAHA … yeah right.
http://www.Boycott-Apple.com and http://www.SecuritytrumpsPrivacy.com The FBI will get what they want here because it is in the best interest of our nation and Tim Cook, every Apple board member and any engineer refusing to cooperate will be thrown in jail…where they belong. Who the hell does Tim Cook think he is?
Incorrect. You are entitled to your opinion, of course
What is that curved device next to his keyboard on the picture?
What is the flat thing plugged into the iMac to Tim’s left in this photo?
probably a SuperDrive