N.Y. judge backs Apple in encryption fight with government

Reuters ^ | February 29, 2016 | BY JULIA HARTE, JULIA EDWARDS AND JULIA LOVE

[Swordmaker]

The U.S. government cannot force Apple Inc (AAPL.O) to unlock an iPhone in a New York drug case, a federal judge in Brooklyn said on Monday, a ruling that bolsters the company's arguments in its landmark legal showdown with the Justice Department over encryption and privacy.

The government sought access to the phone in the Brooklyn case in October, months before a judge in California ordered Apple to take special measures to give the government access to the phone used by one of the shooters in the San Bernardino, California, attacks.

U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein in Brooklyn ruled that he did not have the legal authority to order Apple to disable the security of an iPhone that was seized during a drug investigation.

[Swordmaker]

NY Magistrate Judge James Orenstein has ruled that the US Government cannot force Apple to unlock an iPhone 4S in a drug case where the defendant has pled guilty. The government continued the "All Writs Act" court order requiring Apple to unlock the iPhone despite the guilty plea. Apple also wanted the judge to finish his deliberations on the merits of the order. His ruling echoed many of the arguments that Apple has made in the San Bernardino case, particularly his finding that a 1789 law called the All Writs Act cannot be used to force Apple to open the phone. Ornstein also found that Apple was largely exempt from complying with such requests by a 1994 law (CALEA) that updated wiretapping laws.-- PING!

Apple v. NY FBI/DOJ - Apple WINS!
Ping!

The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me

[DesertRhino]

They want it all right now. The government doesn’t even have sense enough to hold off on dope requests and PRETEND its about terrorism for a short while.

[DesertRhino]

“we only want it for ONE phone.”

[kingu]

"we only want it for ONE phone."

Those are the arguments being used by Iran and Saudi Arabia, they just want it for one phone, it is a really important investigation, and, umm, we're not really going to shoot women in soccer stadiums or stone them or imprison Christians, or...

It amazes me just how many are willing to trade away so many lives just to find out that the iPhone issued by the county of San Bernardino has nothing on it that is useful to the case.

[the_daug]

Rush did a good job explaining the issues of this case. If I understood him correctly the phone is owned by San Bernardino county. Had San Bernardino county set up their phones correctly the backdoor would exist via the owner of the phones. How the Government Bungled the Handling of the San Bernardino iPhone

[North Texas Mac Geek]

#IStandWithApple

[publius911]

I stand with Apple

[DuhYup]

From pages 17, 18 of judge’s ruling:

Finally, Congress largely (but not completely) exempted from CALEA’s general requirement of private assistance to law enforcement a requirement that businesses help agents bypass any encryption that might shield communications from surveillance:

Encryption. A telecommunications carrier shall not be responsible for decrypting, or ensuring the government’s ability to decrypt, any communication encrypted by a subscriber or customer, unless the encryption was provided by the carrier and the carrier possesses the information necessary to decrypt the communication.

Id. § 1002(b)(3).13

13 This provision precludes the government from requiring carriers to build into the encryption measures they make available to their subscribers a “back door” that enables law enforcement access to encrypted communications. It does no more than provide that law enforcement is entitled to have carriers assist in securing access to encrypted information where the carrier in making such encryption available, has also retained a decryption key for its own purposes that would allow such access.

14 In seeking to explain CALEA’s purported irrelevance to this case, the government observes that the instant application does not seek “to compel Apple to develop a technical capability that Apple does not already possess.” Govt. III at 9. Such more intrusive relief, however, is precisely what the government seeks in the California action – relying, as it does here, on the proposition that the requested order is “agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” As discussed below, that fact is
pertinent to a consideration in this case of the reasonableness of the burden the government seeks to impose on Apple.

[DuhYup]

After reading the 50 page ruling, it appears that the judge is less than happy with the govt case. The judge uses the word “absurd” 9 times and lists various points that he wanted the govt to explain but they couldn’t or wouldn’t. The ruling is based on multiple different failings with the govt case not on a trivial quibble.

The judge writes in a very readable and organized fashion.

[21twelve]

Thanks for the excerpt! Not sure that I’ll be wading through this ruling in detail.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” Ben Franklin

[grania]

All the information in the world won't save the US if terror from within isn't ended. The feds would provide a much better service if they stopped situations like terrorist mail-order brides entering the US.

I don't want to give up any more of my freedom and privacy because the gov isn't protecting us from invaders.

[Cyclone59]

What I can’t understand, is that when we screw up our employer issued phone, by entering the wrong password and it locks up, we take it to our IT guy and they unlock it. How come the FBI can’t ask the SB govt to unlock their phone? Well, now maybe I do. Either the federal govt can’t and won’t admit defeat and/or the SB govt IT department is made up of a bunch of slackers. Just a thought.

I know the real reason, the feds just want to be able to invade all Apple users data whenever they want.

[Cyberman]

How the Government Bungled the Handling of the San Bernardino iPhone

Did they bungle it, or did they decide that this was their best chance to set a precedent and deliberately close off the established channel for executing the warrant?

[the_daug]

Are the police your friend?

[SteveH]

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/judges-order-in-apple-case-involving-a-locked-iphone-in-new-york/1887/

[deadrock]

#ISISstandswithApple.