FBI Tells Local Law Enforcement It Will Help Unlock Phones (buzzfeed.com)

Salvador Hernandez, reporting for BuzzFeed: Just days after breaking into a terrorist's iPhone using a mysterious third-party technique, FBI officials on Friday told local law enforcement agencies it will assist them with unlocking phones and other electronic devices. The advisory, obtained by BuzzFeed News, was sent in response to law enforcement inquiries about its new method of unlocking devices. Though the dispatch does not explicitly state if the FBI will use the mysterious third-party method to unlock phones for local authorities, officials said the agency "will of course consider any tool that might be helpful to our partners."

Comments

Re:Why?

[Etherwalk]

99% of people in tech--EVERYBODY who does not work with law enforcement and understands the issues--was against the FBI.

Re:Doesn't matter

[Geoffrey.landis]

One of the two will happen because one of the two need to happen to continue to function in a lawful society.

No. False choice. The other option is that police departments must use other methods to prove crimes.

Re:Why?

[mrbester]

Using that argument, the US would still be a protectorate of Britain. You separatists didn't play nice with the law back then but now you're advocating it?

It's a trade off [Re:Doesn't matter]

[Geoffrey.landis]

It's not a false choice. When key evidence is behind locked doors you need a way to access it. This is precisely why we have search warrants.

Nope. That's a choice made by society, a trade-off between privacy and authority. Law enforcement may say that they "need" a way to access it, but the extent to which we allow law enforcement to access locked vaults is a decision that is made by society, and one of the possible decisions is "no, find a different way to gather evidence."

Re:It's a trade off [Re:Doesn't matter]

[Geoffrey.landis]

We've already made the choice to limit privacy rights of suspected criminals.

Yes, we have. We made a particular choice of limits, where some searches are allowed and some searches aren't.

In the hypothetical case of unbreakable locks you propose, this forces us to yet make another choice. There are not, as you state, only two choices. There are three choices. One of these is to tell law enforcement agencies that they must find evidence elsewhere.

You seem to be making arguments that this choice doesn't exist. That's incorrect.

Now, a harder question is whether this choice should be taken. That's a much harder question, but there are good arguments that it should be (which have been made in great detail elsewhere.) This is a trade-off. That means it has benefits, and costs. To quote Scalia, sometimes it is desirable to "insulate the criminality of a few in order to protect the privacy of us all.”

Re:Wound self-inflicted

[sumdumass]

Can I get a court order for you to pick the cotton on my south fields? I might if you broke a law and it was part of the punishment. But outside that it seems preposterous don't it? Even if I can make some convincing argument.

The problem here is that the law allowing the warrant was created two years before the bill of rights was ratified let alone the amendment banning slavery except as a form of punishment. It is likely using it to force labor out of people would be in violation of these amendments. But using the law to take private property for public use could be constitutional if there is just compensation.

In essence the argument for forcing Apple was we satisfied some of the constitutional requirements but ignore the constitutional prohibitions. A lot of people don't see the problem but those same people will cry foul when some other constitutional prohibition is in violation. What Apple did made them look like asses to those people and heroes to others who couldn't financially afford the fight if pushed on them.

Re:Doesn't matter

[KGIII]

Or we can accept the loss and not set the precedent that the government always wins by use of force. Yes, sometimes it's essential that bad things happen to otherwise good people. In fact, the only way to prevent that from happening is to disallow all freedoms or, alternatively, disallow all humans.

I really tire of this trend toward cowardice and pipe dreams. You will not have a lawful society, ever. That doesn't mean don't outlaw anything. That means establish punishments and impose reasonable restrictions on the government - and on the people. If we can make a lock that the government can't get into, then fuck 'em. Yes, shit's gonna happen. Sorry but that's the price you pay to live in a free society.

By the way, this is the same reason it's true for firearms, driving, owning a sharp steak knife, being allowed to speak, being able to eat steak, go skydiving, swim, run, jump, skip rope, being allowed to worship, etc...

And some of those aren't even RIGHTS - they're privileges. Privacy, by means of the 4th *and* 5th is pretty much an important fucking concept. There's shit the government can not do. That MEANS bad shit is going to happen. Deal with it. Stop trying to take away my liberties because you're scared. Your fear is not a good reason to take away my liberties - even if I don't USE those liberties. I want them ALL. In fact, I want as many as I can get while still retaining a cohesive, tolerant, and functional society.

That means accepting that shit happens sometimes and doing what you can to clean up afterwards - as well as taking reasonable precautions. Giving the government carte blanc to open anything they damned well please, when they've already demonstrated they can't be trusted - especially with the fucking search warrants, is certainly not on the list of reasonable precautions. Hell no...

Why are you so eager to give up my liberties? They're YOUR liberties too, you know. They're not just mine. Hell, I'll be fine - thanks. I'm more worried about your liberties than you are. Sadly, that's not a joke. That's not funny at all. Me? I can get hell out of the country and be fine all over the globe if I absolutely had to. I have liquid assets stored in non-digital format as well as liquid assets in cash format - stored in a variety of places. Trust me, I'll be fine.

You, on the other hand, are stuck here. So aren't a whole lot of other people. They just might like to make use of some of those liberties you're happily giving away because you're a fucking coward.