Terrorism: Unlock the iphone when it is terrorism

The document distributed to San Diego judges indicates it would apply only in cases in which the defendant is also subject to a Fourth Amendment waiver, meaning that person can be stopped and searched by law enforcement at any time without a warrant. Fourth Amendment waivers are common in cases in which a defendant, who is convicted of crime, is placed on probation or mandatory supervision instead of being sent to prison.

“Even though there is a difference of opinion among opposing parties, we expect it to be clarified and decided by the appellate courts.”

Does digital privacy extend to criminals on probation?

The idea that their secret software would somehow fly itself to Russia or China would suggest a complete absence of basic corporate security.

And you wonder why people don't trust the government to keep information it collects secure?

The government yesterday hinted that it may demand that Apple hand over the iOS source code and the encryption key the Cupertino, Calif. company uses to sign updates if it won't comply with a court order to help authorities unlock an iPhone.


In a footnote in a Thursday brief, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said it would be happy to have Apple's source code and digital signing key.

"For the reasons discussed above, the FBI cannot itself modify the software on Farook's iPhone without access to the source code and Apple's private electronic signature," the footnote read. "The government did not seek to compel Apple to turn those over because it believed such a request would be less palatable to Apple. If Apple would prefer that course, however, that may provide an alternative that requires less labor by Apple programmers."

...

Oddly, elsewhere in the DOJ's brief, government lawyers argued that, even if the FBI had the iOS source and Apple's signing key, it would still demand that Apple cooperate further.

"Even if the Court ordered Apple to provide the government with Apple's cryptographic keys and source code, Apple itself has implied that the government could not disable the requisite features because it 'would have insufficient knowledge of Apple's software and design protocols to be effective,'" the brief stated.

A hearing on Apple's objections and the government's response is slated for March 22 before a federal magistrate.

More relevant to the ultimate outcome of the case is the government’s targeted attack on a central legal argument made by Apple: that in order to prevent the iPhone from being erased, the court is breaking new ground by trying to force Apple to write new programs. In its March 10 filing, the government points to a 36-year-old case, “Mountain Bell”, in which a corporation was forced to “program” computers as part of government order to trace calls through a telephone facility. California’s top federal court, the 9th circuit court of appeals, sided with the government in the case. The government cites another case from New York that it says also shows corporations have previously been forced to create new programs to comply with court orders in criminal cases.

Yeah games over!

The govt. already unlocked the so called phone and dropped its suit against Apple.