Slashdot Mirror
US Says It Would Use 'Court System' Again To Defeat Encryption (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader shares an Ars Technica report: U.S. government officials from the FBI director down have said repeatedly that the FBI-Apple legal brouhaha was just about a single phone -- the seized iPhone used by Syed Farook, one of the San Bernardino shooters. And just last week, James Comey, the FBI director, said his fight with Apple wasn't about setting precedent; rather, it was about battling terrorism. But it seems that the storyline has changed. The Justice Department now says it will not hesitate to invoke the precedent it won in its iPhone unlocking case. Having won the court and technological battle a triumphant Department of Justice warned late Monday that its legal battle for what many say amounts to judicially ordered encryption backdoors has only just begun. "It remains a priority for the government to ensure that law enforcement can obtain crucial digital information to protect national security and public safety, either with cooperation from relevant parties, or through the court system when cooperation fails," Melanie Newman, a Justice Department spokesman, wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "We will continue to pursue all available options for this mission, including seeking the cooperation of manufacturers and relying upon the creativity of both the public and private sectors."
Add the letters "ab" to the front of "use" and you'll get a better idea of what the FBI appears to want to do with the courts in this case...
There are still people who believes government lies.
It was obvious right from the beginning that it wasn't about one phone. Enjoy what remain of your privacy while you can.
Now, can I have my +5 mod? Well, I am AC, so I will probably get beaten to it by a logged-in user with a karma bonus.
So now the FBI is claiming they won the court battle? Shameless.
Did the FBI just get one judge to issue an illegal order, then they withdrew the case while that order was under appeal, and claim a precedent-setting win?
Laws and rules exist so we can rule over you. If you won't bend a knee, we'll break it. And make no mistake, we're accountable to no one. That's the attitude throughout the US government.
Of course you aren't. Everyone who isn't in the government was saying this since the FBI first demanded it.
But the real terrorists do not use encryption like that. They don't have to.
The government is trying to push the narrative that the world is just like a Hollywood movie. It isn't. We do not need to give up our privacy so that the government can fight the "bad" men.
When you weaken encryption, you just make the "good" people more vulnerable to criminals.
Both Apple & the government of the USA have learned from the recent spat, partly on the technical front and also on how to present their case in the court of public opinion.
Apple will further remove its ability to break into encrypted 'phones but as importantly be able to paint in bad colours any government that tries to make it do such things. This is assuming that this was not for show to fool ''undesirables'' that Apple 'phones are safe - something that would benefit Apple (more sales) and the government (more good data on the 'phones that it cracks).
The government will look for an even more compelling case so that it can accuse Apple of helping terrorists/paedophiles/... and so win the legal case that sets precedent or be able to pass laws that let it do so.
...the makers of devices and encryption software will fight the US with every fiber of their beings...
Patriot Act 2: Security Boogaloo
Out of curiosity are all safe manufacturers in the United States required to provided master keys to all of their locking mechanisms to the FBI? If a criminal happens to throw some important evidence in a safe do they go after the safe manufacturers?
I was under the impression that the FBI brought in a professional to crack the safe for them. Or if they were really desperate they just blew the thing up knowing that they might damage the contents. Doesn't the same apply here?
It's an Israeli company, so they likely don't have any recourse.
I can't wait until the US guv'munt outlaws encryption on all our phones, then we'll have to go to the Chinese to get our encryption software. I wonder what Alanis Morissette has to say about that.
And you call the FBI to report it, they don't do anything.
They want weak encryption (or no encryption) that is easily cracked, with plenty of backdoors, and then when criminals expose these weaknesses, the government does nothing to protect the citizens from crime.
But hey, shoot up a private party, and as long as you have a funny-sounding name and vaguely brownish skin color, then the government wants to protect you, at any cost.
Of course, double standard -- if you're a white christian male and you shoot up a school full of kids, the response is "hey, shit happens", and the government does nothing.
Really, this country is fucked. Completely.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
U.S. government forces Microsoft and Apple to put backdoors into their products equals nobody buying anything from these two American companies anymore.
The U.S. government is destroying its own economy!
Gee. if only the FBI put as much work into making sure automatic weapons don't get into the hands of criminals as much as they worried about telephones getting into the hands of criminals.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Of course they'll say that. It's not like THEY'RE paying for it.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
We already know secret courts have approved things "for the benfit of the people" to protect them.
The various elements of the US government are already doing the things they wish to "make legal".
It's not about terrorism or even about setting a precedent because that already happened "legally", in a court ruling you never knew existed. IMHO this is about saving face and following the "proper channels" to act in a manner that is acceptable by the multitudes.
You think all the money, time and effort put into mass surveillance and weakening encryption is just going to go away because it's no legal? it wasn't legal to begin with but it happened.
They want to go through a regular court, backed by "the people" (preferably by popular consensus) that will give them the power they already have so next time it will all be legal and "acceptable" because Joe Sixpack agreed.
They will try again and again in many guises until it becomes law. It would have been pushed regardless of who you voted for because you have no vote in matters of security. It cannot be discussed because we're being protected in our name, against our will.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Not sure if a word in your subject line is missing a "k" or an "h"...
Blank until
Law Enforcement seems to be exempt from any laws that inconvenience them....getting a court order was only an attempt at expedience
When all of your wishes have been granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed - Marilyn Manson
Now why would I ever buy a phone like that??
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Did the FBI just get one judge to issue an illegal order, then they withdrew the case while that order was under appeal, and claim a precedent-setting win?
Claiming a win? Sure, because you have people with careers having the biggest-profile case in their life who want to keep their jobs and careers from taking a black mark. Realistically it was sort of a draw and sort of a "let's back the hell off because we might lose this one right now..."
But not exactly on the order. The order wasn't illegal; it's just that it basically issued but Apple could challenge it legally. The briefing to the magistrate judge (which was basically the government vs. the entire tech industry, and was maybe the most extensively briefed issue at the magistrate level in history), would have been the place where it was decided in the first instance, with appeals from there to the district court judge, the court of appeals, and then a petition for (and likely grant of) a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court, where we would have gotten an answer that would probably change when Congress changed the law.
All they need now is a "Mission Accomplished!" banner.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Doesn't matter. The order might be vacated, but the decision that allowed it is still on the books. The order is vacated because it was no longer desired to be enforced. That didn't change the premise under which the order was granted.
the justice department has become the terrorists.