Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday June 15 2018, @01:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the also-submitted-by-Good-Guy-Greg dept.

Apple closes law enforcement loophole for the iPhone

Apple is about to make it much harder for law enforcement agencies to gain access to information on iPhones.

The company will include a new feature, called USB Restricted Mode, in a future update of its iOS software, which runs on iPhones and iPads.

The feature disables data transfer through the Lightning port one hour after a phone was last locked, preventing popular third-party hacking tools used by law enforcement from accessing the device. The port can still be used for charging.

[...] Reuters and The New York Times first reported that Apple (AAPL) had confirmed the new feature. Vice's Motherboard previously reported that Apple was testing the change.

Law enforcement officers have already been quoted opposing the security upgrade:

"If we go back to the situation where we again don't have access, now we know directly all the evidence we've lost and all the kids we can't put into a position of safety," said Chuck Cohen, who leads an Indiana State Police task force on internet crimes against children. The Indiana State Police said it unlocked 96 iPhones for various cases this year, each time with a warrant, using a $15,000 device it bought in March from a company called Grayshift.

[...] Hillar Moore, the district attorney in Baton Rouge, La., said his office had paid Cellebrite thousands of dollars to unlock iPhones in five cases since 2017, including an investigation into the hazing-related death of a fraternity pledge at Louisiana State University. He said the phones had yielded crucial information, and he was upset that Apple planned to close such a useful investigative avenue. "They are blatantly protecting criminal activity, and only under the guise of privacy for their clients," he said.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday June 16 2018, @12:50AM (2 children)

    by jmorris (4844) on Saturday June 16 2018, @12:50AM (#693788)

    You might try reading the 4th Amendment sometime because it doesn't say what you apparently think it does.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    What part of that precludes a search warrant to look at the contents of a seized phone? What part of that precludes forcing the keyholder to use their key to open the phone? Remember, giving Apple money does not transfer ownership rights to their products, they remain the property of Apple, Inc. and they retain the keys that can open em up. Ordering them to use those keys is no different from ordering a bank to open a safe deposit box or a hotel manager or landlord to use their master key to open a unit.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 16 2018, @04:46AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 16 2018, @04:46AM (#693856)

    What part of that precludes a search warrant to look at the contents of a seized phone?

    Nothing, and that's a straw man. They can try to access the contents of a seized phone using their own manpower and resources; they cannot enslave someone and compel them to try to defeat the security scheme or create exploits for it.

    Ordering them to use those keys is no different from ordering a bank to open a safe deposit box or a hotel manager or landlord to use their master key to open a unit.

    The police can do those things, but they should never be able to compel someone else to do them. If they want to open those boxes or units, they should have to find the keys and use them themselves.

    • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday June 16 2018, @06:44AM

      by jmorris (4844) on Saturday June 16 2018, @06:44AM (#693869)

      You keep, willfully it appears, forgetting that Apple is the owner of the device containing information under a valid court order. If I were the judge in one of these cases I'd give em 24 hours to pick from:

      1. Unlock the device and deliver the contents.

      2. Watch me appoint a Special Master with court authority to do it for them after they surrender (under an NDA of course) the full buildable source for the OS, Secure Enclave, boot loader and all encryption keys required. The unlock tool created would remain in the custody of the Court for future use, freeing Apple of all future obligations until such time as they change their technology to render it unusable. Reasonable care would of course be used to keep the information secure, but the government does leak like a sieve and Sovereign Immunity is a thing so they might really want to reconsider that first option.

      You seem to be operating under some Libertarian delusion that tech companies aren't subject to laws. Try looking up Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act [infogalactic.com]