18 February 2016, NYT: Apple Fights Order to Unlock San Bernardino Gunman's iPhone
16 February 2016, Apple: A Message to Our Customers
FEB. 16, 2016
Judge Tells Apple to Help Unlock iPhone Used by San Bernardino Gunman
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON -- A judge in California on Tuesday ordered Apple to help the F.B.I. unlock an iPhone used by one of the attackers in the assault in San Bernardino that killed 14 people in December.
The ruling handed the F.B.I. a potentially important victory in its long-running battle with Apple and other Silicon Valley companies over the government's ability to get access to encrypted data in investigations. Apple has maintained that requiring it to provide the "keys" to its technology would compromise the security of the information of hundreds of millions of users.
The F.B.I. says that its experts have been unable to get into the iPhone 5c used by Syed Rizwan Farook, [1] who was killed by the police along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, after they attacked Mr. Farook's co-workers at a holiday gathering.
Prosecutors said in a court filing that Apple had the "exclusive" means to bypass the security features on the phone, but that the company had "declined to provide that assistance voluntarily." F.B.I. experts say that because of the phone's security features, they risk losing the data permanently after 10 failed attempts to enter the password.
The Justice Department had secured a search warrant for the phone, which is owned by Mr. Farook's former employer, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health. But prosecutors said they saw little choice but to seek the additional order compelling Apple's assistance.
In an unusually detailed directive, Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym of the Federal District Court for the District of Central California ordered Apple to provide "reasonable technical assistance" to the F.B.I. in unlocking the phone. That assistance should allow investigators to "bypass or erase the auto-erase function" on the phone, among other steps, she wrote.
In a statement, Timothy D. Cook, Apple's chief executive, [2] said the company would oppose the order and resist efforts to provide a "back door" to the iPhone, and he called the implications of the government's demands "chilling."
"For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers' personal data because we believe it's the only way to keep their information safe," the company said in the statement. [3] "We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business."
Prosecutors said the contents of the phone could provide crucial evidence about the attackers' communications and contacts before the shooting.
The husband and wife appear to have been motivated by a devotion to violent jihad, but the authorities have not connected them publicly to any extremists overseas. Enrique Marquez, a friend and former neighbor, has been charged with providing them with the assault weapons used in the attack and conspiring with Mr. Farook in an earlier plot that was not carried out.
Eileen M. Decker, the United States attorney in Los Angeles, where the investigation is being handled, said the effort to compel Apple's technical cooperation marked "another step -- a potentially important step -- in the process of learning everything we possibly can about the attack in San Bernardino."
Prosecutors "have made a solemn commitment to the victims and their families that we will leave no stone unturned as we gather as much information and evidence as possible," Ms. Decker said.
James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, has been at odds with Apple and other technology companies for months over whether they should provide de-encryption technology for their products. Without it, he has argued, the bureau is at risk of "going dark" in its investigations. The Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and most of the Republican hopefuls support Mr. Comey's stance.
Apple and other technology companies say that creating an opening in their products for government investigators would also create a vulnerability that Chinese, Iranian, Russian or North Korean hackers could exploit.
Apple, arguing in December against a British proposal that could force it to provide the government with a way into iPhone communications, said the dispute should not be seen "as an all-or-nothing proposition for law enforcement."
"Nothing could be further from the truth," Apple argued. "Law enforcement today has access to more data -- data which they can use to prevent terrorist attacks, solve crimes and help bring perpetrators to justice -- than ever before in the history of our world."
Apple said that "we believe it would be wrong to weaken security for hundreds of millions of law-abiding customers so that it will also be weaker for the very few who pose a threat."
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/us/san-bernardino-shooting.html
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/technology/apple-timothy-cook-fbi-san-bernardino.html