I strongly disagree. Apple chose EXACTLY to protect the security of the American people (including mine), and all other owners of these devices, from an intrusive govt. here, even more intrusive and brutal govts. abroad, and every other 3rd world hacker whom should get access to a specially made hacker tool. You cannot unring a bell, nor uninvent such a tool and technique.
The maker of a safe is not beholden for the actions of the safe owner, nor to the govt. to do their job for them beyond reasonable expectation. Apple has already provided all currently available assistance to the FBI. That is reasonable; creating new OS’s that compromise their security for them is not.
This vague and open-ended writ goes beyond that. They are not asking Apple to open the phone; they are demanding that the locks be changed so they can break in easier. But, if the locks on your safe can be changed at will to an inferior one, that renders your safe useless for any further security beyond casual visitors. Any thief could break in at will.
The purpose of the 4th Amendment is to protect against govt. intrusion. It is not a magic key for the govt. to compel people and business to do their will. It’s supposed to be hard for them to get warrants, and the burden of proof for probable cause and compelling interest is on them. A writ like this is a carte-blanche for fishing expeditions against anyone whose encrypted phone the FBI wants to open, because you can’t make a custom key for this. You can only make a general purpose crowbar. One cannot be secure in ones papers, property, person or effects when such tools are in use.
To top it all off, criminals and terrorists already have encryption tools that render this tool useless on any iPhone they install it on. Anybody that the contact list on that phone might have led to 4 months ago are long gone or too stupid to get away from the usual police work (such as sweating the co-conspirator and parents). But, having that tool out there sure will leave casual users vulnerable. Hope you don’t have any bachelor party pics on there....
Imagine the uproar on FR if this was the govt. demanding that, since the terrorists drove a SUV in a car chase, that Ford must provide the FBI with the means to remotely disable all cars it makes. Or demanding Remington to engineer a remote method to disable guns because, after the fact, some terrorist was found to have used a Remington product.
You forgot one thing, this wasn’t a personal phone, it was government owned.
“The purpose of the 4th Amendment is to protect against govt. intrusion.”
That’s a penumbra of the Fourth, as the SC said in Roe V Wade, but the Fourth is in the BOR to require the federal government to respect the balance of their power to compel evidence that was enshrined in centuries of the English Common Law: a judge’s warrant.
At the time there was fear they would not.
That balance is clearly upset by cheap, convenient encryption.
I believe, until we come to a new way to balance the rights of suspects and seekers of justice, the Fourth can only survive if encryption is not absolute.