Skip to main content

Apple agrees to analyze contents of iPhone found in boat of missing teens

Screen Shot 2016-04-30 at 4.44.02 PM

An iPhone 6 is at the center of an investigation of two missing Florida teens. Last July, 14-year-olds Austin Stephanos and Perry Cohen set out on a boat trip in the Atlantic Ocean, but both of the bodies went missing and boys never returned. The United States Coast Guard performed an eight-day search for the boys, but never found them. Last, month, however, their boat was recovered 100 miles off the shore of Bermuda and on the boat was Stephanos’ iPhone (via ABC News).

The iPhone was initially given to Stephanos’ father, but Cohen’s mother took the case to court to fight that the iPhone should be handed over to experts so its contents could be analyzed for evidence of foul-play and clues as to where the boys disappeared to.

An emergency hearing was held yesterday to rule in the case and an agreement was reached for Apple to analyze the device’s data. Apple, according to the Stephanos’ family attorney, has agreed to take in the iPhone, analyze its contents, seal all evidence, and send it back to the court.

The Cohen family initially took the case to court to argue that the iPhone should have been given to experts from the start by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, not the Stephanos family. The Cohen family and their lawyer said the following in an injunction:

The Plaintiff believes the information on Austin’s iPhone must be collected by technology experts who have the expertise required to extract such data without unnecessary risks of losing such information inadvertently or due to inexperience in such highly technical matters.

At this point, it’s unclear as to what measures Apple will have to take to analyze data on Austin Stephanos’ iPhone, but the device is severely water damaged. Despite this, the Stephanos family says they will “take every means necessary to have that phone forensically analyzed.”

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. viciosodiego - 8 years ago

    See, FBI?
    You have to ask nicely.
    How will they guess the code, tho.
    Will they connect the security enclave to reed the key on it?

    • Jonathan Smyth - 8 years ago

      It doesn’t say that the phone is locked or password protected. Many (most) teens don’t use a password. It’s too inconvenient for them.

      • viciosodiego - 8 years ago

        They use touch ID, tho.

      • mrobertson21 - 8 years ago

        where are you getting this information? lol

      • your stat is totally wrong, i would agree most teens care more about their stuff being kept private.

      • trifster - 8 years ago

        I repair lots of iPhones and many of my customers are the parents of teens who have smashed their screens. The parents know the passcode in 90% of the cases.

  2. Raoul Duke - 8 years ago

    As a resident of Florida I wouldn’t trust Florida FWC to watch my cat for a hour while I ran to the store much less NOT to screw up an iPhone in evidence.
    FWC’s main goal is to bust people for bullshit fines to generate income for the state. I’ve had 2 friends that were busted by them on the Gulf Coast Intercostal waterway for BWI, but they both blew .00 BAL and still had to deal with the courts and pay fines.

    Turn the phone over to Apple, let them get the info out and turn it over to the parents.
    This is WAY different than the FBI case.

  3. mahmudf2014 - 8 years ago

    So please can anyone tell me how is that different from the san bernardino case? I appreciate Apple for trying help in this specific case but they told the world that they can’t unlock an iPhone with iOS 8 because they don’t know the code themselves. Now what are they going to do?

    • I see very few details about this story. My impression is that they can get into the phone already (possibly not locked, or parents know the code) but are looking for more evidence stored on the phone (ie. system files, log data, or app info) that may provide more answers. This would not undermine Apples attempt to create a secure phone as they are not breaking their encryption, just using professionals familiar with the system to look at the files already accessible so they are not accidentally corrupted or deleted.

    • strawbis - 8 years ago

      This is not a Criminal Investigation.

    • jb510 - 8 years ago

      The rightful owner (assuming normal probate/inheretence or simply legal guardian/parent if the kids are still alive) is requesting the phone be analyzed. That all alone is a huge difference.

      • John Smith - 8 years ago

        jb510

        “The rightful owner …. is requesting the phone be analysed. That alone is a huge difference.”

        The rightful owner of the San-Bernadino dead murderer phone was San Bernadino County – it was his work phone.

      • 89p13 - 8 years ago

        John Smith – And, who asked for it to be unlocked – after they “accidentally ” told San Bernadino to change the iCloud password?

        In case you’ve forgotten or are to blinded by your “Patriotic Love for YOUR Government” – IT WAS THE FBI!

        Crawl back under your rock, troll!

      • Aunty T (@AuntyTroll) - 8 years ago

        89p13 – do you always call someone who has a different and no less valid opinion than yours a troll?

        Grow up.

    • mytawalbeh - 8 years ago

      In San Benardino case, FBI asked Apple to write a piece of software that weakens the iOS encryption so they can unlock any iPhone they want without the help from Apple. Further, that was not about one case in particular, it was about the future of encryption at all.
      Let’s not forget how FBI screwed it up when they changed the iCloud password without consulting Apple, left Apple with the hardest option.

    • ivokik - 8 years ago

      May be they just ask the family to help them with some passwords ideas :-)

  4. 89p13 - 8 years ago

    1.) No one said the phone IS locked.

    2.) Perhaps the parent have the password but (see 3).

    3.) The phone has severe water / other damage and needs to be examined to see IF it can be analyzed.

    4.) Apple never said it would / could be unlocked.

    Apple has to analyze the electronics to see if it’s even salvageable enough to recover any data.

    Let’s not jump to conclusions about the outcome of this tragedy and wait and see what can / will do.

    YMMV

  5. scoophk - 8 years ago

    Apple is being asked to analyze the phone they are not being asked to hand over methods of analysis to a 3rd party (FBI) that would enable this 3rd party to open & analyze any phone that comes its way in the future. Methods are still exclusive to Apple – huuuge difference.

  6. pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

    regardless of whether the phone is locked or not — very hypocritical of Apple to pick and choose who they will help and how far they will go to help — if the phone does end up locked, i wonder what Apple will decide to do.

    • This is not hypocritical. Apple refused to create a “back door” to the OS. What Apple has stated it will do in this case is to analyze the phone to see if there is anything that is salvageable from the device. Since the device is so severely water damaged there may be very little hope to obtain any data from it. They have “picked and choose” what they will help with, they have only stated that the will take the device, analyze it and return it sealed to the court.

    • Chad Mark (@ChadsFault) - 8 years ago

      No it’s not hypocritical if the isn’t locked (or is easily unlocked). Apple did everything they could in the San Bernardino case (including providing iCloud backups) outside of writing software to disable the security functions of the phone. It would only be hypocritical if they did that.

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        Apple have stated that it is an invasion of privacy to access a phone and that they reluctantly helped the FBI but drew the line at by-passing a personal password…

        By accessing anything on the phone is a breach of privacy – something Apple banged on about…

        Granted it is in aid to find out what happened to the boys – mostly it is to bring some closure to the parents…but this is no different to bringing closure to the victims parents of the last case…

        Let’s see how far Apple go.

    • eswinson - 8 years ago

      The first step is for Apple to restore the phone to operational condition. This is a service anyone can have done that closed to pay the repair bill. From that point they will probably be able to back it up to iCloud or a computer and let the family restore the data using a known password.

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        This is the first step Apple can do IF you are the owner of the phone — otherwise it’s a breach of privacy…something they felt so strongly about.

  7. This article did mention that the iPhone was owned by the Dad, and given to the son, it doesn’t mention if the son changed the info on the phone to match the son’s AppleID.

  8. John Smith - 8 years ago

    Critical issue here that a COURT has decided on the issues of ownership, privacy vs public interest etc etc – then issued a court order.

    Apple should comply with the court order and do everything they can to provide the information to the court.

    It’s not for the cops or the fish patrol or some oversized, over powerful corporation to decide on this.

    It will need to be seen whether Apple’s policy of deliberate obstruction – by making it increasingly impossible to recover data – will have an effect here. If Apple claim they can’t recover the data, then Apple should be made to pay the $1m to send it to some 14 year old hacker in Lithuania (or whoever it is that does this for the FBI) who does know how to get into it.

  9. Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

    One thing I don’t understand: There are missing persons, minors, probably dead, under unknown and possibly suspicious circumstances. Why is this not a criminal investigation? If there is a criminal investigation this should have been kept as evidence not handed over to the parent. If there is not a criminal investigation, why the hell not?

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