Apple's privacy fight with the FBI explained
Source: Lucas Powers

Anti-government protesters gathered outside Apple store's throughout the U.S. on Tuesday in a show of support for the tech giant in its legal fight with the FBI. (Jewel Samad)


If you've been anywhere on planet Earth with an internet connection in the last week, you've probably heard something about Apple, the FBI and iPhones.

You've also likely picked up on the fact that this is an important story.

There have been a lot of headlines, hot takes and misunderstanding. So what's really going on?

It began when a federal judge in California ordered Apple to help the FBI access the work phone — an iPhone 5c — of Syed Farook, one of two shooters in the ISIS-inspired San Bernardino attack last year that left 14 people dead.

The phone's data is encrypted, and therefore can only be accessed with the correct four-digit pin.

But the phone has security features that make finding the correct passcode difficult. First, the more times an incorrect pin is entered, the longer you have to wait to try again. Second, after 10 incorrect guesses, the phone is wiped clean of data.

That second feature was turned on by the San Bernardino Country government, Farook's employer.

The FBI wants Apple to write new software that would help it circumvent these security features. That would allow investigators to use a method called "brute force" — bombarding the pin mechanism with all possible combinations — until eventually the right pin is entered, unlocking the phone.   

While Farook made a point of destroying two other phones he used, the U.S. Department of Justice says there is possibly critical information "that may reside solely on the phone" in question.

Apple has very vocally refused the order.
Why won't apple Apple help?

CEO Tim Cook said in a public letter that the FBI's request would amount to creating a "back door" into older model iPhones.

"The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals," Cook wrote.


Last week, it was reported that iPhones made in 2014 and later, which have an advanced security feature called the Secure Enclave, would not be susceptible to the software.

But according to Fusion, an Apple executive revealed in a conference call with reporters that the back door being requested could theoretically work on all iPhones, a fact that surprised even some cryptologists.

In an op-ed published in the Washington Post, security technologist Bruce Schneier points out that "there's nothing preventing the FBI" from writing the software themselves, "aside from budget and manpower issues."

"There's every reason to believe, in fact, that such hacked software has been written by intelligence organizations around the world."

        If you want to take a deep dive into iPhone security, click here and here for in-depth discussions about the more technical aspects of this case.

What's special about this case?

Apple admits that it complies with thousands of legal requests for information from police each year. But this case is different, according Chris Calabrese, vice-president of policy at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Democracy and Technology.

"This poses a really fundamental question: Can the government force a company to turn their products into spy devices?" he says. "If Apple is forced to do this, we're going down a perilous path."

The Manhattan District Attorney has already said that his office is currently sitting on more than 100 iPhones that it can't crack. When asked by Charlie Rose if he would pursue similar orders as the FBI if Apple loses the case, his answer was unequivocal: "Absolutely right."

The Intercept, a news and investigative website, also spoke to state's attorneys throughout the U.S. eager to make similar requests.

Interestingly, though, this is not the first time Apple has challenged a U.S. government order to help police bypass encryption security. Court documents unsealed Tuesday show that Apple is refusing to do "burdensome and involved engineering" in at least 12 other cases involving both older and newer model iPhones.