Court extends deadline for Apple to oppose order to unlock iPhone

“Apple Inc. is getting more time to argue against a court order that would force it to break into the iPhone of a shooter in a terrorist attack in California, a standoff that pits the company’s push to protect customers’ privacy against the U.S. government’s efforts to fight crime,” Edvard Pettersson, Dina Bass, and Adam Satariano report for Bloomberg.

“The company’s response in court will be due Feb. 26 instead of Tuesday, said two people familiar with the timeline, who asked not to be identified because the matter wasn’t public,” Pettersson, Bass, and Satariano report. “The federal magistrate who on Feb. 16 granted the Justice Department’s request for an order forcing Apple to help the FBI had given the company five business days to oppose her order.”

“The Justice Department wants Apple to provide customized software that will prevent the data on the phone from being deleted after 10 attempts to input the passcode. The software also must enable agents to send electronic passcodes to the phone, rather than manually typing them in, according to the application. The software would allow agents to automatically enter multiple passcodes to get around the encryption standards,” Pettersson, Bass, and Satariano report. “[Apple CEO Tim] Cook likened the federal order to creating a “master key” that could be used to unlock any number of other iPhones in use around the globe.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: All the way to the Supreme Court, if need be!

Twitter, Facebook, Box support Apple against U.S. government demand to hack iPhone – February 19, 2016
No, Apple has NOT unlocked 70 iphones for law enforcement – February 18, 2016
Apple is right, the U.S. government demand would make us all less secure – February 18, 2016
How Apple will fight the DOJ in iPhone backdoor case: U.S. government’s position stands on 227 year old law – February 18, 2016
USA Today alters logo to support Apple in fight against U.S. government overreach – February 18, 2016
Obama administration claims FBI is not asking Apple for a ‘backdoor’ to the iPhone – February 18, 2016
Privacy activists plan rallies across U.S. to support Apple in battle against U.S. government on February 23rd – February 18, 2016
Google CEO Sundar Pichai wishy-washy on Apple’s fight against U.S. government backdoor demands – February 18, 2016
Why Apple is fighting back against U.S. federal government demands for iPhone access – February 17, 2016
Snowden backs Apple in fight over iPhone; blasts Google’s silence – February 17, 2016
Obama administration: We’re only demanding Apple hack just one iPhone – February 17, 2016
Security firm shows how Apple could bypass iPhone security to comply with FBI request – February 17, 2016
What the Apple court order means for your smartphone privacy – February 17, 2016
EFF opposes U.S. government demand to force Apple to unlock terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
‘Who do they think they are?’ Donald Trump blasts Apple for not unlocking San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
Tim Cook posts open letter opposing U.S. government demands to bypass iPhone encryption – February 17, 2016
Apple CEO opposes court order to help FBI unlock San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
Apple wants judge to rule if it can be forced to unlock defendant’s iPhone – February 16, 2016
U.S. House lawmakers seek to outlaw states from banning encrypted iPhones – February 10, 2016
Obama administration wants access to smartphones – December 15, 2015
Obama administration’s calls for backdoors into encrypted communications echo Clinton-era key escrow fiasco – December 14, 2015


    1. What a moron! You actually think there’s a difference between Democrats and Republicans???

      I would advise you to wake up, but the ensuing revelations may be too great a shock to your feeble psyche.

    2. I’m simply going to copy and paste my response to a similar statement from another MDN post just two days ago:

      Are you stupid? Have you not realized by now that it is the Obama administration that is demanding Apple create the backdoor?

      Obama administration: We’re only demanding Apple hack just one iPhone

      The issue of personal privacy should be of paramount importance to all of us, regardless of how we vote. Put your partisan politics aside and look at the facts, as painful as this will be to you.

      Aditionally, have you noticed that both Obama AND Trump are on the exact same side of this issue?

  1. Prosecutors have a singularly focused view of reality. They want to leave no stone unturned, even if what’s under that stone does not add anything to the case. Details like the Constitution, individual rights, loss of trust in American products, or how foreign governments might react and demand similar access, those things are not important to them. Keeping those urges in check is the responsibility of the courts.

  2. As a former prosecutor, I can assure you that the focus comes from the experience (that almost all of us have) of letting a defense lawyer pound our case by pointing out all the stones that remained unturned. Without turning them, nobody knows that what was under the stones does not add anything to the case. Every one of those stones, the defense counsel will argue, might have concealed evidence that conclusively proved their clients’ innocence. The existence of unturned stones will be used, every time, to suggest reasonable doubt.

    We learn pretty quickly not to leave those stones out there. Some prosecutors are sloppy or corrupt, but most of us are very conscious of our role (as the law says), “Not just to seek convictions, but to see that justice is done.” We can’t do that if we don’t know all the relevant facts, including those under unlikely rocks.

    The problem in this case is that the prosecutors are not just trying to get Apple to turn over a particular stone described in a particular warrant. As I suggest in my long post in the “70 iPhones” thread, they are asking Apple to develop a tool that can be used by anybody to turn over any stone anywhere.

    1. As the people responsible died in the attack, there is no prospect of them having to appear in court, so there will be no defence lawyer looking for unturned stones in this particular case.

      This is solely about exploiting this case to create a precedent so that the FBI ( and inevitably every other intelligence agency around the world too ) will be able to unlock any iPhone in the future.

    2. The thing is what do you do when the stones are all turned? Say there was a possibly to be accused terrorist leader that wanted to go to war against another country, and to do so went to the United Nations with one of his thugs with a concocted up story that this country was involved in blowing up a couple of buildings, had weapons of mass destruction and other hallucinatory conclusions that of course were not going to convince everyone so they walked away from decent civilized behavior went to war and started engaging in torture.

      There is no secret data here, it’s pretty well blatant public information and yet justice is denied from what I would call a most blatant war criminal who committed crimes against humanity. There won’t even be a trial so their innocence is maintained by the lack of a clear trial with a clear outcome. So the people are left rotting in graves, if they are lucky enough to have graves. People slaughtered for made up reasons, innocent people still being held on Guantanamo on the Bay without trial, and being tortured. I’m sure that a weekend visit would be enough for anyone to turn over their phone passcode, you don’t need elaborate software for that.

      When it comes to making crime pay it’s mission accomplished for that nation, a nation that you belong to, so I’m not surprised by what you said in your other post about encryption being a problem, a very serious one for your nation. However, as someone from the free and civilized world I can assure you that modern day encryption presents a solution from the so called law enforcement and so called public safety of your nation… a very real solution, not a made up one.

      As someone who worked as a prosecutor for 30 years, I can assure you that encryption presents a problem for law enforcement and public safety… a very real problem, not a made-up one.

      1. Ah that last tidbit is your original quote: “As someone who worked as a prosecutor for 30 years, I can assure you that encryption presents a problem for law enforcement and public safety… a very real problem, not a made-up one.”

  3. If the Government really wants access to data from any cell phone the legislators should grow a pair and pass legislation that requires built in access from all cell phone manufacturers. Of course this would not be popular and would cost each of them votes (including mine) so they try to go around the system and we end up where we are now.

  4. … Oh good. Maybe the courts can read the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution a few more times, increasing the chance that they’ll actually UNDERSTAND it and ADHERE to it.

    The Fourth Amendment To The US Constitution

    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.