![]() On one side, the Department of Justice has repeatedly advocated for a new method of access, perhaps where Apple would retain encryption keys for devices that law enforcement could then use themselves. He has since said that public safety officials have to learn to live with encryption because the alternative of introducing a backdoor creates more vulnerabilities in devices that everybody uses.įor all the public bluster on both sides of the Going Dark issue, neither tells the full story. "I think efforts like this are important to try to help the public and policy makers understand what is going on," Jim Baker, former general counsel of the FBI and now director of national security and cybersecurity at thinktank the R Street Institute, told Motherboard in a phone call.īaker was the FBI's head lawyer during the San Bernardino case, where the Department of Justice tried to legally compel Apple to introduce a flaw into a version of its operating system to make it easier for law enforcement to unlock an iPhone. In the absence of a backdoor, forensic companies which focus on unlocking or extracting data from iPhones continue to offer their tools, with the price of such tools decreasing dramatically in recent years to tens of thousands of dollars. Apple and privacy experts say that having encryption enabled on phones and messaging services by default makes everyone safer, and that building a backdoor would make encrypted technology inherently weaker. The data adds specifics to the so-called Going Dark debate, a phenomenon where law enforcement agencies say they are unable to access evidence stored on phones or read peoples' encrypted messages even if they have a warrant to do so. ![]() The analysis found that federal authorities including the FBI, DEA, and DHS have extracted evidence from iPhones in crimes ranging from drug trafficking, to fraud, to child exploitation. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |