“‘Should the FBI have the right to compel a company to produce a product it doesn’t already make, to the FBI’s exact specifications and for the FBI’s use?’ Sewell argues in his testimony,” Williams reports. “FBI Director James Comey, who will also testify before a separate Judiciary panel on Tuesday, argues that the request is tailored only for shooter Syed Rizwan Farook’s device… But he also acknowledged that a decision in the case could be ‘instructive’ for other courts, a subtle shift from an earlier position that it was ‘not about setting a precedent.'”
“Sewell references Comey’s shift in his own testimony,” Williams reports. “‘Just last week Director Comey agreed that the FBI would likely use this precedent in other cases involving other phones,” his testimony says. “[Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance] has also said he would absolutely plan to use this on over 175 phones… Building that software tool would not affect just one iPhone. It would weaken the security for all of them.'”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Of course it would weaken security for all iPhones.
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Tim Cook can probably defy the US government all he wants and not go to jail – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook picks up where Snowden left off in privacy debate – February 29, 2016
Obama administration set to expand sharing of data that N.S.A. intercepts – February 28, 2016
If Apple loses, your home could be the next thing that’s unlocked: Access to your security cameras would be just a judge order away – February 28, 2016
The Apple vs. FBI fight is about something more basic than software and laws – February 28, 2016
Apple privacy battle with Washington looms as watershed moment – February 26, 2016
Apple’s lawyer: If we lose, it will lead to a ‘police state’ – February 26, 2016
Apple: The law already exists that protects us from U.S. government demands to hack iPhone – February 26, 2016