• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The FBI’s War on Phones Is Bigger Than You Think

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,343
Reaction score
82,724
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The FBI’s War on Phones Is Bigger Than You Think

The FBI’s War on Phones Is Bigger Than You Think
February 23, 2016

defense-large.jpg

Apple’s lawyers revealed the feds want access to about a dozen devices after San Bernardino



James Comey, the director of the FBI, has insisted that his agency’s ongoing conflict with Apple over a terrorist’s phone is just that: a conflict over one phone. But in fact, the iPhone 5c that belonged to Syed Farook—one of the perpetrators of December’s mass shooting in San Bernadino, California—is only one of at least a dozen of Apple devices the FBI is seeking to access, according to court documents unsealed Tuesday. In a letter addressed to a federal judge in New York, a lawyer for Apple said that federal law enforcement has recently requested that the company access information on 12 other iOS devices. The list is likely not a complete tally of the FBI’s requests, and does not include similar requests from state or local police.

Here’s why this all matters: These 12 pending requests—and probably many more that didn’t make the list—are a logjam waiting to break. If the federal judge in the San Bernardino case sides with the FBI, it would be much easier for the judges overseeing these other, similar cases to compel Apple to comply. Apple maintains that this case is not, in fact, about just one phone; it’s about precedent. Meanwhile, there are a whole lot more devices waiting in the wings, in the hands of state and local law enforcement. The Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. says he’s asked Apple to unlock a whopping 175 iPhones. If the government wins in San Bernardino, Vance told PBS’s Charlie Rose recently, he would “absolutely” try to get Apple to help get data off those devices, too.

It’s likely the government chose to take the San Bernardino case public, instead of one of the other pending cases, because it can make a very strong argument for needing to get into a terrorist’s iPhone. Comey wrote compellingly in his recent open letter that the FBI is duty-bound to pursue every lead in a national-security investigation. Here, Apple is forced to take a position that obstructs a crucial-seeming probe, in contrast to the other cases, which did not involve terrorism charges.

Apple is correct in that the government seeks to establish precedent. Contrary to FBI assurances, San Bernardino is not a one-off request.


Solid support for Apple in iPhone encryption fight: poll

In a new poll released today, 46% agreed with Apple, 35% disagreed, and 20% did not know.
 
The government always wants more power and control. Always. The FBI fails to mention that they could conduct their investigation the good old fashioned way if they chose to. Social web sites are a fairly recent phenomenon. They also fail to mention that the government (NSA) already has the meta data they seek. Don't let them fool you.
 
Back
Top Bottom