US Department of Justice files motion to force Apple to crack terrorist's iPhone

Posted:
in General Discussion edited February 2016
Apple's complex saga involving data encryption, civil liberties and national security took yet another twist on Friday when the U.S. Department of Justice weighed in, filing a motion attempting to compel the iPhone maker to create a backdoor to unlock a secured iPhone.




The DOJ has asked a federal judge to compel Apple to help the FBI in its investigation of the San Bernardino, Calif., terrorist attack in December that resulted in 16 deaths and another 24 injuries. Friday's filing was first revealed by ABC News.

"Rather than assist the effort to fully investigate a deadly terrorist attack by obeying this court's order of February 16, 2016, Apple has responded by publicly repudiating that order," the DOJ filing states.
"Rather than assist the effort to fully investigate a deadly terrorist attack by obeying this court's order of February 16, 2016, Apple has responded by publicly repudiating that order." - U.S. Department of Justice
The DOJ went on to say that Apple's refusal to cooperate is "based on its concern for its business model and public brand marketing strategy."

Prior to the DOJ filing, Apple was already at odds with a U.S. magistrate judge, who ordered the company to comply with government requests to help extract data from an iPhone 5c. That handset was owned by one of the shooters involved in the San Bernardino terrorist attack, and it is password protected via Apple's iOS 9 mobile operating system.

Thus far, Apple has rejected requests from the FBI to build a "backdoor" to its iOS platform in order to unlock the handset. In an open letter published earlier this week, CEO Tim Cook said the creation of a backdoor tool to access a locked iPhone would set a dangerous precedent, and potentially lead to major security issues for mobile devices.

"The FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation," Cook wrote. "In the wrong hands, this software -- which does not exist today -- would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone's physical possession."

The Justice Department's support of the FBI comes as no surprise -- this week the White House said the FBI simply wants access to just one iPhone, and not blanket backdoor access to all iOS devices. But in Cook's view, "there is no way to guarantee such control."

Apple has until Feb. 26 to respond to the U.S. magistrate judge's ruling with a filing in court.
«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 127
    The DOJ is one of the most corrupt departments in the government today, and that's saying a lot.

    Pound sand, Lynch. 
    tallest skilbrian greenlord amhranlostkiwicornchipboltsfan17lollivermwhitemagman1979snova
  • Reply 2 of 127
    Tim is Shaking in his boots (Not). 

    One phone = Precedent = All phones/devices no longer private.
    No privacy = No liberty (Give me Liberty or give me Death)
    Apple has taken the correct position on this issue.
    Apple is too big to fail = They will prevail.



    apple headbrian greencalicornchiplatifbplolliverradster360dm3anantksundaramAustinCable
  • Reply 3 of 127
    When the government - regardless of which herd of useless hacks is in charge - acts like our rights and needs count for anything more than funding Pentagon pimps and corporate weevils, I'll investigate self-restraint.  Until then, the DOJ can stick their concerns where the sun don't shine.
    apple headbrian greenlolliverentropysjbdragon
  • Reply 4 of 127
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Minor detail: the 5c was owned by the San Bernardino County Dept. of Health. It was a work phone which is why I expect when the murderers crushed their own cellphones and didn't bother with this one.

    The DoJ couldn't care less about sanitary inspection reports, they're after a masterkey and a precedent.

    So they filed another whine with Pym? Like she needs encouragement. She didn't even request input from Apple before rubber stamping the original DoJ request for a masterkey software kit.
    edited February 2016 brian greenlostkiwicalilatifbpcornchiplollivermagman1979anantksundaramjahbladejbdragon
  • Reply 5 of 127
    komokomo Posts: 25member
    On this issue I would not trust the US or Canadian government
    brian greenjbishop1039lostkiwiSpamSandwichmagman1979argonaut
  • Reply 6 of 127
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    This is the same mob of cretins who tried to force Microsoft to hand over the contents of emails held on a sever in Ireland, to set a precedent for extraterritorialy extending the reach of their hegemony, rather than go through the established channels and ask the Irish authorities to grant access.

    Not terribly hard to see a common theme here and an obvious orchestrated agenda.
    brian greencalicornchiplollivermagman1979anantksundaramjkichlinedesignrargonautbrakken
  • Reply 7 of 127
    I'm usually on the side of tech companies but I really feel Apple is in the wrong here. 
    DaleCutler
  • Reply 8 of 127
    DOJ is demanding that Apple produce new software to meet this request. Apple shouldn't be doing such work for free, and they are standing up to this precedent. DOJ is in the wrong.
    brian greenlostkiwicalilatifbplolliverradster360anantksundaramjwbl33jbdragonbrakken
  • Reply 9 of 127
    The sooner Apple makes it to where NOONE can crack the encryption, the better.  Government is never one to help in the privacy of any citizen, but will do everything they can to spy on absolutely everyone.  


    The irony here is that this case throws the bu!!sh!t flag in the face of the NSA who's been quietly telling the world that they have everyone's data already.  If that were literally the case, the FBI could walk over to the NSA and get everything they wanted without the phone at all.  This obviously isn't the case, so the NSA isn't doing what people thought they were.  

    Apple needs to improve encryption and make it bombproof so that no one, even them, can access anything against some's will.  
    calibbhanantksundaramjbdragonhlee1169
  • Reply 10 of 127
    #IStandWithApple

    How about it? 
    brian greenlatifbpcalilolliverradster360anantksundaramphotography guy
  • Reply 11 of 127
    I am wondering what would Jack Bauer and Chloe do under this kind of situation. The whole 24 series would fall apart. Would JB point his gun at someone and yell "there is no enough time" and "now tell me..." etc.
  • Reply 12 of 127
    The same DOJ that declared Apple guilty of a "bad" ebook model before there was even a trial right? 

    They actual mentioned Apple was guilty in their eyes months before a trial even started. There was no amount of contrary evidence that was going to stop them. 

    That department is run by fools. 

    Certainly they arent after justice. 

    DOA is more like it. 

    Department Of Agenda. 
    edited February 2016 brian greenlostkiwicalipalominelollivermagman1979radster360jkichlinejbdragonhlee1169
  • Reply 13 of 127
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    A motion to compel?...before Apple has filed a response?
    heh heh... Just in case Apple tries to drag its feet?
    i hope Apple digs its heels in. 
    brian greenlostkiwilatifbpcalipalominelollivermagman1979argonautbrakken
  • Reply 14 of 127
    They're just trying to kill Apple so the pentagon can steal the new Apple HQ. 

    Joking. 

    Kinda...
    edited February 2016 quadra 610palominejax44jwbl33argonautbrakkennolamacguy
  • Reply 15 of 127
    Where was the NSA on this? Weren't they listening in on the terrorists conversations?
    lostkiwibrian greencalisailorpaul
  • Reply 16 of 127
    chiachia Posts: 712member
    In other news today DoJ files a motion to force a farmer in Iowa to make his pigs fly…
    brian greencalijfc1138icoco3baconstangjbdragoncornchipargonaut
  • Reply 17 of 127
    alexrod87 said:
    I'm usually on the side of tech companies but I really feel Apple is in the wrong here. 
    Amazing how many single post attacks against Apple there are on the site now.
    minglok50brian greencalipalominemwhitegtricoco3jax44magman1979pscooter63
  • Reply 18 of 127

    frac said:
    A motion to compel?...before Apple has filed a response?
    heh heh... Just in case Apple tries to drag its feet?
    i hope Apple digs its heels in. 
    They'll have to since the president is a no-show on this issue and lawmakers are quite eager to destroy our constitutional protections.
    brian greenjbdragoncornchipsailorpaul
  • Reply 19 of 127

    dogman said:
    Where was the NSA on this? Weren't they listening in on the terrorists conversations?
    "They hear everything, but understand little."
    calichiaargonaut
  • Reply 20 of 127
    alexrod87 said:
    I'm usually on the side of tech companies but I really feel Apple is in the wrong here. 
    I believe you have sided with any tech company that isn't Apple. Why is Apple wrong about privacy?
    calimwhitejbdragonhlee1169cornchipargonautbadmonksailorpaul
Sign In or Register to comment.