[Cryptography] OCR'd DOJ Motion to Compel Apple

Tom Mitchell mitch at niftyegg.com
Sat Feb 20 21:35:55 EST 2016


On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Henry Baker <hbaker1 at pipeline.com> wrote:

> FYI -- OCR'd version of DOJ's motion to compel Apple.  I cleaned it up a
> little, but there are almost certainly additional errors, so double check
> everything with the pdf file.
>
> Exhibit 1 is just Tim Cook's letter:
>
> http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
>
>
> http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Apple-iPhone-access-MOTION-TO-COMPEL.pdf
>
> ----.....



>  passcode. The Order does not, as Apple's public statement
> alleges, require Apple to create or provide a "back door" to every
> iPhone; it does not provide "hackers and criminals" access to
> iPhones; it does not require Apple to "hack [its] own users" or to
> "decrypt" its own phones; it does not give the government "the power
> to reach into anyone's device" without a warrant or court
> authorization; and it does not compromise the security of personal
> information.


The document makes it clear that this is the First phone.   It states
that "without a warrant or court authorization" and clearly implies
there are more in the offing.

It makes it clear that the FBI laments the loss of the previous services.

It removes the checks that a checksum verified and crypto signed image file
provided by previous services would have provided. With a stingray
like tool connectivity could be managed and stuff moved into and out
of the phone and dates and time in the phone altered at will.

It would establish the existence of such a service and open the door to
additional
demands of functionality.  While this writ cites extra ordinary
considerations
and speculation future writs need only cite the existence of the service.

It neither make nor offers no fair compensation for the service.
Two managers, 7x24 security, dedicated secure facility, engineers
bound by more than a simple corporate NDA.  Legal staff costs.

Even if exactly one phone was altered a legal staff would have to
deal with requests for a decade.   how does the commercial end... PRICELESS!

It notes that this is little different than other software install
processing.
This validates that once done it  can be compelled for any, perhaps all
phones and any update serviced device.

It can compel any newer Samsung TVs to redirect audio to a recording
monitor station.

It lengthens the long arm of the law by a lot.

The interesting bit is that they state that there is no law covering this.
i.e. absence of a law is tacit permission for the government to do this
and perhaps anything.  The comment about "technology vs. law" can
be applied to anything new.   This is troubling because any inventor
will be subject to a writ until such time as a law exists.

Interesting times.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20160220/5296ac37/attachment.html>


More information about the cryptography mailing list