Apple is firing back at the government saying they could have accessed the phone of the San Bernadino shooter had his password not been changed after the FBI seized the device.
Apple executives pointed out that Syed Farook's icloud remove account had been reset with a new passcode by his employer, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, who owned the phone just 24 hours after the shooting.
Had that not happened his cloud would have been accessible if the phone was taken to a location where it recognized the Wi-Fi network according to ABC News.
This is just one of the four different ways Apple has offered to help the government get information from the phone they claim without using a backdoor that would allow them to hack directly into the device.
Scroll down for video
Response: The Justice Department has filed a motion seeking to compel Apple to comply with a judge's order for the company to unlock the iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters. Pictured above, Apple CEO Tim Cook
Gunmen: Cook issued a statement on Wednesday, saying the company planned to fight the court order to hack into Syed Farook's phone (right). Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik (left) were killed in a shootout with polcie after killing 14 people at Farook's holiday party in December
Apple was hit twice Friday over its refusal to crack open one of the San Bernardino terrorist's iPhone with Donald Trump demanding a boycott and a fresh federal legal bid to force its hand.
The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a motion seeking to compel Apple to comply with a judge's order for the company to unlock the iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, according to a court document filed Friday.
Hours after the DOJ filed the motion, Trump called for a boycott on the company until it complies with the court order.
The FBI is seeking the tech giant's help to access the shooter's phone, which is encrypted. The company so far has pushed back, and on Thursday won three extra days to respond to the order.
Prosecutors said the company has chosen to repudiate a judge's order instead of following it.
WHAT INVESTIGATORS WANT
Judge Sheri Pym of U.S. District Court in Los Angeles said that Apple must provide 'reasonable technical assistance' to investigators seeking to unlock the data on an iPhone 5C that had been owned by Syed Rizwan Farook.
That assistance includes disabling the phone's auto-erase function, which activates after 10 consecutive unsuccessful passcode attempts, and helping investigators to submit passcode guesses electronically.
However, Apple says this is akin to 'a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks - from restaurants and banks to stores and homes.'
The department also says Apple designs its products to allow technology - 'rather than the law' - to control access to critical data.
Apple CEO Tim Cook first said that the company would be fighting the order in a strongly-worded statement issued Wednesday, saying complying with the FBI's orders would set a 'dangerous precedent'.
Perhaps the biggest dig at Apple in the latest motion was prosecutors' allegations that the company was doing it all to enhance its brand.
In the motion, prosecutors claim that before Apple updated the software on their iPhones, the company regularly complied with government warrants to search phones.
'Based on Apple's recent public statement and other statements by Apple, Apple's current refusal to comply with the Court's Order, despite the technical feasibility of doing so, instead appears to be based on its concern for its business model and public brand marketing strategy,' the motion reads.
While the technology to break into phones may have been present on older versions of the iPhone software, Cook claimed that the company no longer has the technological means to break into newer versions and that creating one would compromise all user security.
'In the wrong hands, this software - which does not exist today - would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone's physical possession,' Cook wrote.
'The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a back door.
'And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.'
Prosecutors addressed this concern in the motion, saying that Apple doesn't even need to turn over the software to them at all.
The story has become a hot topic on the presidential campaign trail, and on Friday, Republican front-runner Donald Trump reiterated his support for the Feds by calling for a Apple boycott.
'What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number. Boycott apple!' Trump said at a rally at a country club in South Carolina.
'First of all, the phone's not owned by this young thug that killed all these people. The phone's owned by the government. Okay? Not even his phone! We don't have to go that far,' he added.
Trump's statement immediately became the butt of jokes online, as users on Twitter pointed out that many of the presidential candidate's tweets show they were written on his iPhone - but he then made clear he was going to use his Samsung instead.
Apple is getting support from some however, including businessman Mark Cuban who wrote about the company on his blog Friday.
'Amen. A standing ovation. They did the exact right thing by not complying with the order,' said Cuban.
'They are exactly right that this is a very, very slippery slope. And while the FBI is attempting to be very clear that this is a one off request, there is no chance that it is. '
Nice try: Trump's statement immediately became the butt of jokes online, as users on Twitter pointed out that many of the presidential candidate's tweets show they were written on his iPhone
Switching phones: Trump later responded to the criticism, saying he will be using only Samsung devices now
In his statement on Wednesday, Cook noted the court order and said 'this moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.'
Cook argued that the order 'has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.'
Pym's order to Apple to help the FBI hack into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino, California shooters set the stage for a legal fight between the federal government and Silicon Valley over a first-of-its-kind ruling.
The order, in which Apple is being directed to assist the FBI in breaking into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardo shooters, represents a significant victory for the Justice Department.
Impact: Since Apple's announcement on Wednesday, the company's stock has been slowly lowering. However, the statement did cause the stock to momentarily jump
The Obama administration has embraced stronger encryption as a way to keep consumers safe on the Internet, but struggled to find a compelling example to make its case.
Cook said that the U.S. government order would undermine encryption by using specialized software to create a back door that he compared to a 'master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks.'
Josh Earnest, the White House spokesman today deferred to the Justice Department but said it was important to recognize the government is not asking Apple to 'create a new backdoor to its products.'
He said the case was about federal investigators learning 'as much as they can about this one case.'
'The president certainly believes that is an important national priority,' he said.
FBI Director James Comey told members of Congress last week that encryption is a major problem for law enforcement who 'find a device that can't be opened even when a judge says there's probable cause to open it.'
Password: Federal investigators are trying to gain access to suspect Farook's work phone. Currently, Apple does not have a means of breaking the passcode, but the court has ordered the company to figure out a way around the passcode to gain access to the phone's contents. Above, the suspects' battered SUV
The ruling on Tuesday tied the problem to the deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil since the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people in a December 2 shooting at a holiday luncheon for Farook's co-workers. The couple later died in a gun battle with police.
Federal prosecutors told the judge in the court proceeding - that was conducted without Apple being allowed to participate - that investigators can't access a work phone used by Farook because they don't know his passcode and Apple has not cooperated.
Under U.S. law, a work phone is generally the property of a person's employer. The judge told Apple to provide an estimate of its cost to comply with her order, suggesting that the government will be expected to pay for the work.
Apple has provided default encryption on its iPhones since 2014, allowing any device's contents to be accessed only by the user who knows the phone's passcode.
The ruling by Pym, a former federal prosecutor, requires Apple to supply highly specialized software the FBI can load onto the county-owned work iPhone to bypass a self-destruct feature, which erases the phone's data after too many unsuccessful attempts to unlock it.
The FBI wants to be able to try different combinations in rapid sequence until it finds the right one.
However, some security experts say the request is possible because the phone in question is an older iPhone 5C which does not have a fingerprint sensor or Apple's latest security feature, known as a secure enclave.
'Based on my initial reading of the request and my knowledge of the iOS platform, I believe all of the FBI's requests are technically feasible,' said Dan Guido on Trail of Bits Blog.
The Electronic Frontier foundation, a nonprofit well known for fighting for digital rights, backed Tim Cook and Apple.
'We are supporting Apple here because the government is doing more than simply asking for Apple's assistance,' it said.
'For the first time, the government is requesting Apple write brand new code that eliminates key features of iPhone security—security features that protect us all.
'Essentially, the government is asking Apple to create a master key so that it can open a single phone.
Victims: A composite photo of all 14 victims from the San Bernardino shooting rampage. They are top row left: Robert Adams, Isaac Amanios, Bennetta Betbadal, Harry Bowman and Sierra Clayborn. Second row from left: Juan Espinoza, Aurora Godoy, Shannon Johnson, Larry Daniel Kaufman and Damian Meins. Bottom row from left: Tin Nguyen, Nicholas Thalasinos, Yvette Velasco and Michael Wetzel
'And once that master key is created, we're certain that our government will ask for it again and again, for other phones, and turn this power against any software or device that has the audacity to offer strong security.
'The U.S. government wants us to trust that it won't misuse this power. But we can all imagine the myriad ways this new authority could be abused.
'Even if you trust the U.S. government, once this master key is created, governments around the world will surely demand that Apple undermine the security of their citizens as well.'
It was not immediately clear what investigators believe they might find on Farook's work phone or why the information would not be available from third-party service providers, such as Google or Facebook, though investigators think the device may hold clues about whom the couple communicated with and where they may have traveled.
The couple took pains to physically destroy two personally owned cell phones, crushing them beyond the FBI's ability to recover information from them.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next
Distraught Kesha in tears after judge rules the singer must... Trump calls for Apple BOYCOTT over company's refusal to help... Billionaire Ken Griffin ties for largest art deal of all... Tributes pour in from George W Bush to Oprah and Tim Cook...
Share this article
Share
2.4k shares
They also removed a hard drive from their computer; it has not been found despite investigators diving for days for potential electronic evidence in a nearby lake.
Farook was not carrying his work iPhone during the attack.
It was discovered after a subsequent search. It was not known whether Farook forgot about the iPhone or did not care whether investigators found it.
The phone was running the newest version of Apple's iPhone operating system, which requires a passcode and cannot be accessed by Apple, unlike earlier operating systems or older phone models.
San Bernardino County provided Farook with an iPhone configured to erase data after 10 consecutive unsuccessful unlocking attempts.
The FBI said that feature appeared to be active on Farook's iPhone as of the last time he performed a backup.
The judge didn't spell out her rationale in her three-page order, but the ruling comes amid a similar case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Investigators are still working to piece together a missing 18 minutes in Farook and Malik's timeline from December 2.
Investigators have concluded they were at least partly inspired by the Islamic State group; Malik's Facebook page included a note pledging allegiance to the group's leader around the time of the attack.
In 2014, Apple updated its iPhone operating system to require that the phone be locked by a passcode that only the user knows.
Previously, the company could use an extraction tool that would physically plug into the phone and allow it to respond to search warrant requests from the government.
TIM COOK'S FULL STATEMENT ON APPLE'S DECISION TO FIGHT HACKING ORDER
A Message to Our Customers
The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.
The Need for Encryption
Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.
All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.
Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.
For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers' personal data because we believe it's the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.
The San Bernardino Case
We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government's efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.
When the FBI has requested data that's in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we've offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, 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. 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 FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.
The Threat to Data Security
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today's digital world, the 'key' to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.
A Dangerous Precedent
Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by 'brute force,' trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government's demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone's device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone's microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
We are challenging the FBI's demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.
While we believe the FBI's intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.
Tim Cook
Advertisement
Read more:
Victim's Family Outraged Apple Didn't Voluntarily Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone | NBC Southern California
EFF to Support Apple in Encryption Battle | Electronic Frontier Foundation
Apple can comply with the FBI court order - Trail of Bits Blog
Apple and iPhone News, Features and Product Launches | Daily Mail Online
Latest California News, Weather and Drought Updates | Daily Mail Online
Motion against Apple
San Bernardino Shooter's Apple ID Passcode Changed While in Government Possession, Apple Says - ABC News
Apple Vs The FBI vs a Suggestion | blog maverick
Apple executives pointed out that Syed Farook's icloud remove account had been reset with a new passcode by his employer, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, who owned the phone just 24 hours after the shooting.
Had that not happened his cloud would have been accessible if the phone was taken to a location where it recognized the Wi-Fi network according to ABC News.
This is just one of the four different ways Apple has offered to help the government get information from the phone they claim without using a backdoor that would allow them to hack directly into the device.
Scroll down for video
Response: The Justice Department has filed a motion seeking to compel Apple to comply with a judge's order for the company to unlock the iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters. Pictured above, Apple CEO Tim Cook
Gunmen: Cook issued a statement on Wednesday, saying the company planned to fight the court order to hack into Syed Farook's phone (right). Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik (left) were killed in a shootout with polcie after killing 14 people at Farook's holiday party in December
Apple was hit twice Friday over its refusal to crack open one of the San Bernardino terrorist's iPhone with Donald Trump demanding a boycott and a fresh federal legal bid to force its hand.
The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a motion seeking to compel Apple to comply with a judge's order for the company to unlock the iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, according to a court document filed Friday.
Hours after the DOJ filed the motion, Trump called for a boycott on the company until it complies with the court order.
The FBI is seeking the tech giant's help to access the shooter's phone, which is encrypted. The company so far has pushed back, and on Thursday won three extra days to respond to the order.
Prosecutors said the company has chosen to repudiate a judge's order instead of following it.
WHAT INVESTIGATORS WANT
Judge Sheri Pym of U.S. District Court in Los Angeles said that Apple must provide 'reasonable technical assistance' to investigators seeking to unlock the data on an iPhone 5C that had been owned by Syed Rizwan Farook.
That assistance includes disabling the phone's auto-erase function, which activates after 10 consecutive unsuccessful passcode attempts, and helping investigators to submit passcode guesses electronically.
However, Apple says this is akin to 'a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks - from restaurants and banks to stores and homes.'
The department also says Apple designs its products to allow technology - 'rather than the law' - to control access to critical data.
Apple CEO Tim Cook first said that the company would be fighting the order in a strongly-worded statement issued Wednesday, saying complying with the FBI's orders would set a 'dangerous precedent'.
Perhaps the biggest dig at Apple in the latest motion was prosecutors' allegations that the company was doing it all to enhance its brand.
In the motion, prosecutors claim that before Apple updated the software on their iPhones, the company regularly complied with government warrants to search phones.
'Based on Apple's recent public statement and other statements by Apple, Apple's current refusal to comply with the Court's Order, despite the technical feasibility of doing so, instead appears to be based on its concern for its business model and public brand marketing strategy,' the motion reads.
While the technology to break into phones may have been present on older versions of the iPhone software, Cook claimed that the company no longer has the technological means to break into newer versions and that creating one would compromise all user security.
'In the wrong hands, this software - which does not exist today - would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone's physical possession,' Cook wrote.
'The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a back door.
'And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.'
Prosecutors addressed this concern in the motion, saying that Apple doesn't even need to turn over the software to them at all.
The story has become a hot topic on the presidential campaign trail, and on Friday, Republican front-runner Donald Trump reiterated his support for the Feds by calling for a Apple boycott.
'What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number. Boycott apple!' Trump said at a rally at a country club in South Carolina.
'First of all, the phone's not owned by this young thug that killed all these people. The phone's owned by the government. Okay? Not even his phone! We don't have to go that far,' he added.
Trump's statement immediately became the butt of jokes online, as users on Twitter pointed out that many of the presidential candidate's tweets show they were written on his iPhone - but he then made clear he was going to use his Samsung instead.
Apple is getting support from some however, including businessman Mark Cuban who wrote about the company on his blog Friday.
'Amen. A standing ovation. They did the exact right thing by not complying with the order,' said Cuban.
'They are exactly right that this is a very, very slippery slope. And while the FBI is attempting to be very clear that this is a one off request, there is no chance that it is. '
Nice try: Trump's statement immediately became the butt of jokes online, as users on Twitter pointed out that many of the presidential candidate's tweets show they were written on his iPhone
Switching phones: Trump later responded to the criticism, saying he will be using only Samsung devices now
In his statement on Wednesday, Cook noted the court order and said 'this moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.'
Cook argued that the order 'has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.'
Pym's order to Apple to help the FBI hack into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino, California shooters set the stage for a legal fight between the federal government and Silicon Valley over a first-of-its-kind ruling.
The order, in which Apple is being directed to assist the FBI in breaking into an encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardo shooters, represents a significant victory for the Justice Department.
Impact: Since Apple's announcement on Wednesday, the company's stock has been slowly lowering. However, the statement did cause the stock to momentarily jump
The Obama administration has embraced stronger encryption as a way to keep consumers safe on the Internet, but struggled to find a compelling example to make its case.
Cook said that the U.S. government order would undermine encryption by using specialized software to create a back door that he compared to a 'master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks.'
Josh Earnest, the White House spokesman today deferred to the Justice Department but said it was important to recognize the government is not asking Apple to 'create a new backdoor to its products.'
He said the case was about federal investigators learning 'as much as they can about this one case.'
'The president certainly believes that is an important national priority,' he said.
FBI Director James Comey told members of Congress last week that encryption is a major problem for law enforcement who 'find a device that can't be opened even when a judge says there's probable cause to open it.'
Password: Federal investigators are trying to gain access to suspect Farook's work phone. Currently, Apple does not have a means of breaking the passcode, but the court has ordered the company to figure out a way around the passcode to gain access to the phone's contents. Above, the suspects' battered SUV
The ruling on Tuesday tied the problem to the deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil since the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, killed 14 people in a December 2 shooting at a holiday luncheon for Farook's co-workers. The couple later died in a gun battle with police.
Federal prosecutors told the judge in the court proceeding - that was conducted without Apple being allowed to participate - that investigators can't access a work phone used by Farook because they don't know his passcode and Apple has not cooperated.
Under U.S. law, a work phone is generally the property of a person's employer. The judge told Apple to provide an estimate of its cost to comply with her order, suggesting that the government will be expected to pay for the work.
Apple has provided default encryption on its iPhones since 2014, allowing any device's contents to be accessed only by the user who knows the phone's passcode.
The ruling by Pym, a former federal prosecutor, requires Apple to supply highly specialized software the FBI can load onto the county-owned work iPhone to bypass a self-destruct feature, which erases the phone's data after too many unsuccessful attempts to unlock it.
The FBI wants to be able to try different combinations in rapid sequence until it finds the right one.
However, some security experts say the request is possible because the phone in question is an older iPhone 5C which does not have a fingerprint sensor or Apple's latest security feature, known as a secure enclave.
'Based on my initial reading of the request and my knowledge of the iOS platform, I believe all of the FBI's requests are technically feasible,' said Dan Guido on Trail of Bits Blog.
The Electronic Frontier foundation, a nonprofit well known for fighting for digital rights, backed Tim Cook and Apple.
'We are supporting Apple here because the government is doing more than simply asking for Apple's assistance,' it said.
'For the first time, the government is requesting Apple write brand new code that eliminates key features of iPhone security—security features that protect us all.
'Essentially, the government is asking Apple to create a master key so that it can open a single phone.
Victims: A composite photo of all 14 victims from the San Bernardino shooting rampage. They are top row left: Robert Adams, Isaac Amanios, Bennetta Betbadal, Harry Bowman and Sierra Clayborn. Second row from left: Juan Espinoza, Aurora Godoy, Shannon Johnson, Larry Daniel Kaufman and Damian Meins. Bottom row from left: Tin Nguyen, Nicholas Thalasinos, Yvette Velasco and Michael Wetzel
'And once that master key is created, we're certain that our government will ask for it again and again, for other phones, and turn this power against any software or device that has the audacity to offer strong security.
'The U.S. government wants us to trust that it won't misuse this power. But we can all imagine the myriad ways this new authority could be abused.
'Even if you trust the U.S. government, once this master key is created, governments around the world will surely demand that Apple undermine the security of their citizens as well.'
It was not immediately clear what investigators believe they might find on Farook's work phone or why the information would not be available from third-party service providers, such as Google or Facebook, though investigators think the device may hold clues about whom the couple communicated with and where they may have traveled.
The couple took pains to physically destroy two personally owned cell phones, crushing them beyond the FBI's ability to recover information from them.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next
Distraught Kesha in tears after judge rules the singer must... Trump calls for Apple BOYCOTT over company's refusal to help... Billionaire Ken Griffin ties for largest art deal of all... Tributes pour in from George W Bush to Oprah and Tim Cook...
Share this article
Share
2.4k shares
They also removed a hard drive from their computer; it has not been found despite investigators diving for days for potential electronic evidence in a nearby lake.
Farook was not carrying his work iPhone during the attack.
It was discovered after a subsequent search. It was not known whether Farook forgot about the iPhone or did not care whether investigators found it.
The phone was running the newest version of Apple's iPhone operating system, which requires a passcode and cannot be accessed by Apple, unlike earlier operating systems or older phone models.
San Bernardino County provided Farook with an iPhone configured to erase data after 10 consecutive unsuccessful unlocking attempts.
The FBI said that feature appeared to be active on Farook's iPhone as of the last time he performed a backup.
The judge didn't spell out her rationale in her three-page order, but the ruling comes amid a similar case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Investigators are still working to piece together a missing 18 minutes in Farook and Malik's timeline from December 2.
Investigators have concluded they were at least partly inspired by the Islamic State group; Malik's Facebook page included a note pledging allegiance to the group's leader around the time of the attack.
In 2014, Apple updated its iPhone operating system to require that the phone be locked by a passcode that only the user knows.
Previously, the company could use an extraction tool that would physically plug into the phone and allow it to respond to search warrant requests from the government.
TIM COOK'S FULL STATEMENT ON APPLE'S DECISION TO FIGHT HACKING ORDER
A Message to Our Customers
The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.
The Need for Encryption
Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.
All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.
Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.
For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers' personal data because we believe it's the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.
The San Bernardino Case
We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government's efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.
When the FBI has requested data that's in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we've offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, 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. 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 FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.
The Threat to Data Security
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today's digital world, the 'key' to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.
A Dangerous Precedent
Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by 'brute force,' trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government's demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone's device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone's microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
We are challenging the FBI's demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.
While we believe the FBI's intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.
Tim Cook
Advertisement
Read more:
Victim's Family Outraged Apple Didn't Voluntarily Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone | NBC Southern California
EFF to Support Apple in Encryption Battle | Electronic Frontier Foundation
Apple can comply with the FBI court order - Trail of Bits Blog
Apple and iPhone News, Features and Product Launches | Daily Mail Online
Latest California News, Weather and Drought Updates | Daily Mail Online
Motion against Apple
San Bernardino Shooter's Apple ID Passcode Changed While in Government Possession, Apple Says - ABC News
Apple Vs The FBI vs a Suggestion | blog maverick
columbus.maxey@arcor.de
