You’ve actually got a point there. When you use a technique to gain access to a technological device, the defense is entitled to access to that technique, in all details, including the technology, so they can challenge how it was done. Some things must remain a secret. That is one of the reasons why Apple will not unlock individual phones.
A couple decades ago, a pedophile murderer was thought to keep his files on a Blackberry phone. The prosecutors convinced RIMM, because of the heinous nature of the crime, to break with their previous policy to unlock the previously inviolate Blackberry security and allow the evidence to be used against the defendant. The judge in the case, in response to a defense pleading, ordered Blackberry to reveal to the defense’s IT specialist under court seal, how the Blackberry was protected and how it was unlocked, so they could consider if it was in someway useful for the defense.
The defense’s teenage IT specialist, against the court ordered seal, made copies of the unlocking technique (Gee, who could have guessed), and shared it with some of his buddies!
If that was not bad enough with the techniques now out in the hacker and scammer communities, after the trial and conviction, the idiot judge, in response to petitions from the media, citing Freedom of the press. open trials, and the right of the people to know, unsealed everything in the case, including the RIMM proprietary data! So much for RIMM’s vaunted security that was what made it special enough that governments were buying and using their Blackberry products. RIMM had to go back and completely re-invent its security and privacy using a completely different paradigm.
Thanks for sharing the RIMM story.
Apple’s IP is of greater importance as far as I’m concerned. And I’m not confident the DOJ is being sincere. The PR seems so JV