Attorneys for Applicant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF
AN APPLE IPHONE SEIZED DURING
THE EXECUTION OF A SEARCH
WARRANT ON A BLACK LEXUS IS300,
CALIFORNIA LICENSE PLATE
35KGD203
ORDER COMPELLING APPLE,
INC. TO ASSIST AGENTS IN SEARCH
This matter is before the Court pursuant to an application
pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651, by Assistant United
States Attorneys Tracy Wilkison and Allen Chiu, requesting an order
directing Apple Inc. (”Apple”) to assist law enforcement agents in
enabling the search of a digital device seized in the course of a
previously issued search warrant in this matter.
For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Apple shall assist in enabling the search of a cellular telephone,
Apple make: iPhone 5C, Model: A1532, P/N:MGFG2LL/A, S/N:FFMNQ3MTG2DJ,
IMEI:358820052301412, on the Verizon Network, (the “SUBJECT DEVICE”)
pursuant to a warrant of this Court by providing
reasonable technical assistance to assist law enforcement agents in
obtaining access to the data on the SUBJECT DEVICE.
2. Apple’s reasonable technical assistance shall accomplish
the following three important functions: (1) it will bypass or
disable the auto-erase function whether or not it has been enabled;
(2) it will enable the FBI to submit passcodes to the SUBJECT DEVICE
for testing electronically via the physical device port, Bluetooth,
Wi-Fi, or other protocol available on the SUBJECT and (3) it
will ensure that when the FBI submits passcodes to the SUBJECT
DEVICE, software running on the device will not purposefully
introduce any additional delay between passcode attempts beyond what
is incurred by Apple hardware.
3. Apple’s reasonable technical assistance may include, but is.
not limited to: providing the FBI with a signed iPhone Software
file, recovery bundle, or other Software Image File (”SIF”) that can
be loaded onto the SUBJECT DEVICE. The SIF will load and run from
Random Access Memory (”RAM”) and will not modify the iOS on the
actual phone, the user data partition or system partition on the
device’s flash memory. The SIF will be coded by Apple with a unique
identifier of the phone so that the SIF would only load and execute
on the SUBJECT DEVICE. The SIF will be loaded via Device Firmware
Upgrade (”DFU”) mode, recovery mode, or other applicable mode
available to the FBI. Once active on the SUBJECT DEVICE, the SIF
will accomplish the three functions specified in paragraph 2. The
SIF will be loaded on the SUBJECT DEVICE at either a government
facility, or alternatively, at an Apple facility; if the latter,
Apple shall provide the government with remote access to the SUBJECT
DEVICE through a computer allowing the government to conduct passcode
recovery analysis.
4. If Apple determines that it can achieve the three functions
stated above in paragraph 2, as well as the functionality set forth
in paragraph 3, using an alternate technological means from that
recommended by the government, and the government concurs, Apple may
comply with this Order in that way.
5. Apple shall advise the government of the reasonable cost of
providing this service.
6. Although Apple shall make reasonable efforts to maintain
the integrity of data on the SUBJECT DEVICE, Apple shall not be
required to maintain copies of any user data as a result of the
assistance ordered herein. All evidence preservation shall remain
the responsibility of law enforcement agents.
7. To the extent that Apple believes that compliance with this
Order would be unreasonably burdensome, it may make an application to
this Court for relief within five business days of receipt of the
Order.
Signed: SHERI PYM
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Dated: FEB 16, 2016
I’ve read it. And then I’ve read dependent review and commentary. But it’s typical DC spark with massive subjectivity so any decent attorney could drive a truck through the requests.
1.) Apple shall assist? Based on what? It’s not their property. They are not a criminal, nor a defendant.
2.) Reasonable? Upon who’s testimony is this derived? What happens if an engineer makes a mistake and the data is deleted? Does Apple become liable legally? Oh no I’m sure the Gov wouldn’t do anything like that...
3.) yea this is typical garbage legalize. The first sentence tells me it’s unlimited, and is not limited to anything... Just meet their demands or else.
4.) So glad that the government must approve of their methods. Too bad they didn’t ask Apple before THEY changed the pass codes!
5.) Reasonable cost? How about 100B. Since this will impact their business in every country in the WORLD!
6.) How does this pass the chain of custody smell test? I have no idea.
7.) irreparable harm to their corporate brand, and potential,to make them liable and accountable to break their products at the whim of every country in the world?
Long term this is a horrible endeavor!