The government wants to reverse an important ruling on iPhone encryption
The government still wants into that iPhone. No, the other iPhone.
The Department of Justice has formally told the courts that it still needs Apple's help to access the iPhone in a Brooklyn drug case. Back in February -- when the focus was mostly on the iPhone of the San Bernardino shooter, a case that was ultimately dropped when the FBI cracked the phone without Apple's help -- a New York judge ruled against the government and sided with Apple that the law meant law enforcement couldn't compel Apple to assist.
You May Also Like
That was an important ruling because the law -- the centuries-old All Writs Act -- is the same one the FBI initially tried to use in the San Bernardino case. In that case, now dropped, the FBI and DoJ wanted to use the AWA to compel Apple to create a new version of iOS that would disable key security features on the phone in question, an iPhone 5C running iOS 9.
In the Brooklyn case, the phone is actually an iPhone 5 running the older iOS 7, making it theoretically much easier to "hack." Considering that -- as well as the fact that the accused in the Brooklyn case, Jun Feng, pled guilty -- the ongoing legal fight is no longer really about the case itself and more about the precedent it could set.
The ongoing legal fight is no longer really about the case itself and more about precedent.
While the New York ruling isn't binding in cases elsewhere, it could influence other judges as the issue of device encryption comes up again and again in the courts. During Apple's public and legal fight with the FBI, a New York District Attorney said he had 175 phones in evidence that may potentially hold evidence of crimes -- phones that he'd compel Apple to unlock, if he could.
Which is why the DoJ is appealing the moot New York case. Any ruling in Apple's favor weakens the government's overall position, and strengthens Apple's argument that tech companies shouldn't be forced to help law enforcement bypass encryption. While its most high-profile case has gone away, as we've said, the debate over device security vs. national security is far from over.
You can read the DoJ's brief filing below.
Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.
Topics Apple Cybersecurity
Pete Pachal was Mashable’s Tech Editor and had been at the company from 2011 to 2019. He covered the technology industry, from self-driving cars to self-destructing smartphones.Pete has covered consumer technology in print and online for more than a decade. Originally from Edmonton, Canada, Pete first uploaded himself into technology journalism at Sound & Vision magazine in 1999. Pete also served as Technology Editor at Syfy, creating the channel's technology site, DVICE (now Blastr), out of some rusty HTML code and a decompiled coat hanger. He then moved on to PCMag, where he served as the site's News Director.Pete has been featured on Fox News, the Today Show, Bloomberg, CNN, CNBC and CBC.Pete holds degrees in journalism from the University of King's College in Halifax and engineering from the University of Alberta in Edmonton. His favorite Doctor Who monsters are the Cybermen.
