Apple cannot unlock an iPhone for government investigators "in most cases now and in the future," lawyers for the company said in a brief submitted to a U.S. District Court, while acknowledging it had some access to the phone at the heart of a Justice Department case.
The DoJ's unlock request would normally be "substantially burdensome," the company said in a Monday court filing seen by the Wall Street Journal. Apple pointed out that the full-disk encryption feature in iOS 8 and 9 should prevent anyone from accessing an iPhone's data without the passcode, including Apple itself.
The phone the Justice Department wants to investigate, however, is running iOS 7, and Apple admitted that it has the capacity to extract "certain categories of unencrypted data" — excluding email, calendar entries, and third-party app data.
It nevertheless said it would prefer to avoid pulling information from the phone unless forced to, since that might "threaten the trust between Apple and its customers and substantially tarnish the Apple brand."
The company submitted the brief at the request of Magistrate Judge James Orenstein, who is known to favor limits on government surveillance. In an earlier ruling, he suggested that he may not have the authority to force Apple's cooperation, something the Justice Department disputes.
Since 2013 leaks by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, Apple has made privacy one of its key marketing points, attacking rival products as insecure. CEO Tim Cook repeated this position at conference on Monday, making a particular point to oppose the backdoors demanded by some U.S. government officials. These would make it easier to fulfill legitimate search warrants, but critics have complained that it would also make mass surveillance easier and expose devices to hackers.
24 Comments
Yes. Apple should not cave in and have government ability to spy on their people. Maybe this is also a reason why Apple is a popular brand in China.
You go, Apple. I am totally behind you, 100%. However, that only applies up until I need you to decrypt a phone for my personal benefit. For example, a loved one has been kidnapped, and the information on a phone might return them to me. In that case, I am against you 100%. In summary: Protect my information. But not the guy who took my loved one. He doesn't deserve protection. Now solve my koan. GO!
The government should make ads starring Chloe O'Brian and Jack Bauer trying to decrypt a phone, with Jack saying he'll have to torture a guy if Chloe can't break the encryption. Funny how the same old ticking time bomb/kidnapping scenarios get recycled for the encryption debate that we previously heard in the torture debate.
Funny how they've always said hey can't and now they say they can .. How is that possible ?
You go, Apple. I am totally behind you, 100%.
However, that only applies up until I need you to decrypt a phone for my personal benefit. For example, a loved one has been kidnapped, and the information on a phone might return them to me.
In that case, I am against you 100%.
In summary: Protect my information. But not the guy who took my loved one. He doesn't deserve protection.
Now solve my koan. GO!
'Koan'? Curious word so I looked it up. You may mean conundrum rather than the nonsensical or paradoxical question aka koan. Or a synonym for an impossible choice. But thanks for the word of the day.