Apple–FBI encryption dispute

The Apple–FBI encryption dispute concerns whether and to what extent courts in the United States can compel manufacturers to assist in unlocking cell phones whose data are cryptographically protected.

Most of these seek to compel Apple "to use its existing capabilities to extract data like contacts, photos and calls from locked iPhones running on operating systems iOS 7 and older" in order to assist in criminal investigations and prosecutions.

The work phone was recovered intact but was locked with a four-digit passcode and was set to eliminate all its data after ten failed password attempts (a common anti-theft measure on smartphones).

In March 2018, the Los Angeles Times reported "the FBI eventually found that Farook's phone had information only about work and revealed nothing about the plot" but cited only government claims, not evidence.

[6] It was revealed as a part of the 2013 mass surveillance disclosures by Edward Snowden that the NSA and the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) had access to the user data in iPhones, BlackBerry, and Android phones and could read almost all smartphone information, including SMS, location, emails, and notes.

On February 9, 2016, the FBI announced that it was unable to unlock the county-owned phone it recovered, due to its advanced security features, including encryption of user data.

The FBI responded by successfully applying to a United States magistrate judge, Sheri Pym, to issue a court order, mandating Apple to create and provide the requested software.

[24][25][26] The use of the All Writs Act to compel Apple to write new software was unprecedented and, according to legal experts, it was likely to prompt "an epic fight pitting privacy against national security.

"[53] On March 21, 2016, the government requested and was granted a delay, saying a third party had demonstrated a possible way to unlock the iPhone in question and the FBI needed more time to determine if it will work.

[54][55][56] On March 28, 2016, the FBI said it had unlocked the iPhone with the third party's help, and an anonymous official said that the hack's applications were limited; the Department of Justice withdrew the case.

[61] Although the FBI claimed they were able to use other technological means to access the cellphone data from the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone 5C, without the aid of Apple, law enforcement still expresses concern over the encryption controversy.

However, The Washington Post reported that, according to anonymous "people familiar with the matter", the FBI had instead paid "professional hackers" who used a zero-day vulnerability in the iPhone's software to bypass its ten-try limitation, and did not need Cellebrite's assistance.

[81] The Reform Government Surveillance coalition, which includes major tech firms like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo!, Twitter, and LinkedIn, has indicated its opposition to the order.

[82][83][84] By March 3, the deadline, a large number of amicus curiae briefs were filed with the court, with numerous technology firms supporting Apple's position, including a joint brief from Amazon.com, Box, Cisco Systems, Dropbox, Evernote, Facebook, Google, Lavabit, Microsoft, Mozilla, Nest Labs, Pinterest, Slack Technologies, Snapchat, WhatsApp, and Yahoo!.

[85][86][87] The think tank Niskanen Center has suggested that the case is a door-in-the-face technique designed to gain eventual approval for encryption backdoors[88] and is viewed as a revival of the Crypto Wars.

[94] General Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA and the Central Intelligence Agency, in a March 7 interview with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox Business Network, supported Apple's position, noting that the CIA considers cyber-attacks the number one threat to U.S. security and saying that "this may be a case where we've got to give up some things in law enforcement and even counter terrorism in order to preserve this aspect, our cybersecurity.

[99] He later indicated that the method he would employ, extracting the unique ID from inside the A7 processor chip, is difficult and risks permanently locking the phone, and that he was seeking publicity.

[100] Ron Wyden, Democratic senator for Oregon and a noted privacy and encryption advocate, questioned the FBI's honesty concerning the contents of the phone.

[90] All candidates for the Republican nomination for the 2016 U.S. presidential election who had not dropped out of the race before February 19, 2016, supported the FBI's position, though several expressed concerns about adding backdoors to mobile phones.

"[113] In an address to the 2016 South by Southwest conference on March 11, President Barack Obama stated that while he could not comment on the specific case, "You cannot take an absolutist view on [encryption].

[115][116] In September 2016, the Associated Press, Vice Media, and Gannett (the owner of USA Today) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FBI, seeking to compel the agency to reveal who it hired to unlock Farook's iPhone, and how much was paid.

She also alleged that some OTD officials were indifferent to FBI leadership (herself included)[120] giving possibly misleading testimony to Congress and in court orders that they had no such capability.

Chuang claimed the CEAU Chief didn't ask for their help due to a "line in the sand" against using classified security tools in domestic criminal cases.

When asked why the ROU was not involved earlier the Chief of Technical Surveillance Section (TSS), Eric Chuang's superior, initially said it was not in his "lane" and it was handled exclusively by the DFAS because "that is their mandate".

Hess said the CEAU Chief wanted to use the case as a "poster child" to resolve the larger problem with encrypted devices known as the "Going Dark challenge".

The challenge is defined by the FBI as "changes in technology [that] hinder law enforcement's ability to exercise investigative tools and follow critical leads".

The unidentified method used to unlock Farook's phone - costing more than $1 million to obtain - quit working once Apple updated their operating system.

[4] The Inspector General's report found that statements in the FBI's testimony before Congress were accurate but relied on assumptions that the OTD units were coordinating effectively from the beginning.

However, according to Chuang – whom described himself as a "relationship holder" for the vendor – they were not actively working to complete the solution and that it was moved to the "front burner" on his request; to which the TSS Chief agreed.

In response to the Inspector General's report, the FBI intended to add a new OTD section to consolidate resources to address the Going Dark problem and to improve coordination between units.