Justice Department argues against Apple's encryption claims

The Department of Justice said Apple should be able to unlock phones if the government demands it according to the All Writs Order

The Department of Justice (DoJ) has argued against Apple CEO Tim Cook's claims that encryption is essential on iPhones.

The debate came about after it was suggested that Apple should unlock an iPhone that was detained as part of a drugs probe, but Tim Cook said it was "too burdensome" to do so and the matter became a much bigger issue regarding encryption on devices.

Now the All Writs Order has come into play, which has in the past led to smartphone manufacturers having to unlock devices from the homescreen if and when requested by law. However, the Order was written in 1789, so seems a little out of date in today's technologically-charged world.

Apple is refusing to allow access to the device, but the DoJ stated that it has been able to convince Apple to unlock devices in the past when involved in a criminal investigation and cited three instances when it had successfully managed to infiltrate smartphones. Why is this case different?

"Apple agrees with the court's preliminary conclusion that the All Writs Act should not be read to permit the relief the government requests," Apple said in its latest court filing. "This case is not an instance where the government seeks to fill in a statutory gap that Congress has failed to consider,' but rather one where the government seeks to have the court give it authority that Congress chose not to confer.'"

It continued by arguing that it's no different to the government requesting that a company travels around the country unlocking safes holding confidential information.

Magistrate Judge James Orenstein, who has had some success representing companies subject to the All Writs Act then said he wanted Apple to explain why unlocking the device would be "burdensome".

Apple responded that it wouldn't necessarily be such, because the device in question is running iOS7, which doesn't offer end-to-end encryption, but could potentially harm the company's reputation because it would be going against the company's promise to encrypt its users devices and protect their data.

Featured Resources

Unleashing the power of AI initiatives with the right infrastructure

What key infrastructure requirements are needed to implement AI effectively?

Download now

Achieve today. Plan tomorrow. Making the hybrid multi-cloud journey

A Veritas webinar on implementing a hybrid multi-cloud strategy

Download now

A buyer’s guide for cloud-based phone solutions

Finding the right phone system for your modern business

Download now

The workers' experience report

How technology can spark motivation, enhance productivity and strengthen security

Download now

Recommended

Your essential guide to internet security
Security

Your essential guide to internet security

27 Jan 2021
Mimecast links breach to SolarWinds hackers
Security

Mimecast links breach to SolarWinds hackers

27 Jan 2021
TikTok vulnerability exposed private user data
data protection

TikTok vulnerability exposed private user data

26 Jan 2021
SonicWall hacked via zero-day flaw in remote access tools
Security

SonicWall hacked via zero-day flaw in remote access tools

25 Jan 2021

Most Popular

WhatsApp could face €50 million GDPR fine
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

WhatsApp could face €50 million GDPR fine

25 Jan 2021
How to move Windows 10 from your old hard drive to SSD
operating systems

How to move Windows 10 from your old hard drive to SSD

21 Jan 2021
What is a 502 bad gateway and how do you fix it?
web hosting

What is a 502 bad gateway and how do you fix it?

12 Jan 2021