U.S. Attorney General Says iPhone Unlock Request Won't Lead to Widespread Privacy Breaches

[MacRumors]

With the court date for the iPhone unlocking case between Apple and the FBI just over a week away, United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch decided to speak on the issue during an episode of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert last night (via TechCrunch). After Colbert asked about her likely stance on the topic, Lynch said that she has "had a number of great conversations with Tim Cook on issues of privacy," and remarked on the sensitivity of the issue.

"Well, you know, we've disagreed publicly in court and I've had a number of great conversations with Tim Cook on issues of privacy. What I'll say about this, though, is I understand why this is important to everybody, because privacy is an important issue for everyone. It's important to me, as the Attorney General, it's important to me as a citizen."

As it has been heavily reported since mid-February, the case revolves around the FBI's request for Apple to unlock the iPhone 5c of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook. Apple CEO Tim Cook has taken a stance against the court order, which Colbert brought up to Lynch in last night's interview. The host noted Cook's belief that creating such a backdoor into the iPhone could lead to a "slippery slope" into privacy concerns for all Apple device users.

Lynch's defense lies in Cook's alleged misrepresentation of what the FBI wants the company to do in regards to Farook's iPhone. In the interview, she claims that they are "not asking for a backdoor," and that the court order filed requesting Apple's compliance is "very narrow," suggesting Cook's fear of an anti-privacy precedent is unwarranted.

"Well you know, first of all, we're not asking for a backdoor, and nor are we asking for him to turn anything on to spy on anyone. We're asking them to do what their customer wants. The real owner of the phone is the county, the employer of one of the terrorists who's now dead. What we're asking them to do is to help us disable the password erase function that basically wipes the phone if you guess the password wrong after ten times. We will try to get into the phone, we will extract the evidence under the court order that we have gotten that's very narrow, it's very focused."

Lynch's comments support a recent document released by the prosecutors representing the United States government in the case against Apple, in which they refer to the original filing for Apple's participation a "modest" request that would never lead to a "master key" that could unlock all iPhones against the will of their owners. Nevertheless, Apple will appear in court to fight the order on March 22, following the recently confirmed March 21 date of its "Let Us Loop You In" media event.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: U.S. Attorney General Says iPhone Unlock Request Won't Lead to Widespread Privacy Breaches

 

[TheRealTVGuy]

Sorry, Ms. Attorney General, but the NSA's actions and the Patriot Act are enough for me to call "Shenanigans" and not have any trust or faith in the argument you're trying to make.

 

[Rocketman]

Is this the same AG who feels the private server with classified information on it, marked or not, is just fine? This is the most politically motivated AG in my lifetime. I trust nothing that comes out of her mouth and soon an election will fix that bad noise.

 

[benh911f]

This is a woman who recently said there have been discussions in the DOJ about bringing legal action against people who exercise their First Amendment Right in regards to the question of climate change.
She's the last person I would believe.

 

[Bigsk8r]

It is not Apple's fault that the county did not take more steps to keep their property from being placed in a state that they cannot recover, or for not doing bi-weekly iCloud backup checks to ensure that each device was being backed up per common sense policy.

Not Apples monkeys. Not Apples circus. Go away FBI.

 

[justperry]

The bad thing is, it affects ALL iPhone users in the world, if it was USA only most outside of the US wouldn't care.

 

[0248294]

She's a good actress, I have to give her that credit.

 

[soupcan]

Aww, she thinks she knows tech.

Plot twist: she doesn't.

 

[Studioman]

If it's so easy, why haven't they done it themselves. Are they saying that they can't break the encryption on a common phone? I'm sure real criminals and goverments use stronger encryption or are they just use to all the holes in Windows products.

 

[keysofanxiety]

"Well you know, first of all, we're not asking for a backdoor, and nor are we asking for him to turn anything on to spy on anyone. What we're asking them to do is to help us disable the password erase function that basically wipes the phone if you guess the password wrong after ten times. We will try to get into the phone, we will extract the evidence under the court order that we have gotten that's very narrow, it's very focused."

Not this rubbish again. They keep missing the point that in order to disable the password erase function, Apple will have to create software that essentially acts as a backdoor due to the level of security on their phones. They can't just disable it on one specific phone, because the same software could be applicable on any iPhone.

It's like asking somebody to create a fob that unlocks only one specific car without any previous keys or information to go on -- but in engineering that, it can unlock any car of the same model, regardless of what its usage would be.

 

[duffman9000]

What a freaking liar.

 

[2010mini]

Yes it will.

What the FBI and DOJ are asking for is a tool. A tool which has to be disclosed to defense attorneys during normal course of trials. This is the very reason the NSA does not want to give the FBI its tools for cracking encryption. Because any case it is used in will have to be disclosed.

This is how that can and will get out in the wild.

 

[kch50428]

This is from the same administration that said if you like your insurance plan and doctor(s) you could keep them...

Nothing but vocal emissions from an orifice not on their cranium....

 

[8692574]

Pinky promise?

 

[lowendlinux]

I generally approve when politicians take their case to the people but I think the government would be doing much better if they just shut their collective mouths. At this point if Apple loses they get to play the martyr then the USG loses the war.

The worse part is their choice of the case their using to put the pressure on. The man did a great job of destroying everything related to the crime, there was nothing in the iCloud back up so breaking this phone doesn't pass the common sense test.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Dear AG, your wishin', hopin', prayin', just sayin' doesn't meant you have a clue about what you are talking about.

Some have mooted you for a potential Supreme Court appointment. Based on what you are trying to sell to the citizenry, I think you are not qualified.

Please go home, you are power drunk.

 

[Benjamin Frost]

When a United States Attorney General is so clueless, what hope is there for mankind?

 

[BeefCake 15]

Then when it happens, you'll have a new AG in office to condemn the previous AG and everyone carries on with their lives...

 

[QCassidy352]

Mod delete please. Thanks.

 

[WiseAJ]

The "real owner" should have had MDM enabled. Can't blame Apple for their own mistake.

 

[lowendlinux]

The "real owner" should have had MDM enabled. Can't blame Apple for their own mistake.

The real owner of the SW is Apple and the government want's that SW broken.

 

[macfacts]

If it's so easy, why haven't they done it themselves. Are they saying that they can't break the encryption on a common phone? I'm sure real criminals and goverments use stronger encryption or are they just use to all the holes in Windows products.

FBI can't do it themselves cause only Apple has the signing key to digitally sign their software. Same signing key that will prevent hackers and FBI from using GOVTos on any iPhone cause the court order is for the GOVTos to be for a specific iPhone ID.

Since you want the FBI to do it themselves, that's what they are going to so. They are going to get the iOS source code and signing key and do it themselves > http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/11/fbi-could-force-apple-to-hand-over-private-key

 

[tkukoc]

I almost take what she said for real (yeah right).. then I remembered shes on a late night TV program. Seriously? Go on the news and discuss this if it's so important. Hitting up late night is just drumming up press because they'll use it as fodder. This whole "issue" has been way overblown, it's a witch hunt at this point.

 

[duffman9000]

Absolutely false. There are plenty of reasons to oppose what the FBI wants here, but the "tool" being turned over to defense attorneys is not one of them.

On a broader note: do we really need a new front page story on this every time a new person weighs in? The positions and arguments are pretty clear and haven't changed. It doesn't really matter that it's now the AG saying it.

What is false about what was said? You're spreading FUD. The positions have definitely changed maybe you're not paying attention?

 

[logicstudiouser]

A failed spin tactic from the government.