Here's why the FBI went after Apple when it did

[sinkspur]

http://fortune.com/2016/02/28/apple-fbi-budget-hoover/

Here's Why the FBI Went After Apple When It Did

by  Philip Elmer-DeWitt  @philiped  FEBRUARY 28, 2016, 9:16 AM EST


Timing is everything.

J. Edgar Hoover was a master at this game. The legendary FBI director would latch on to the latest boogeyman—the Lindbergh kidnapper, a big-name gangster, Nazi spies, Communists—and leverage the press coverage to extract more money from Congress for his growing crime-fighting agency.

Forgive me if I see shades of J. Edgar in the FBI’s latest budget request, submitted to Congress exactly one week before a terrorist’s iPhone became front page news.

There are hundreds of iPhones in police custody that the FBI can’t crack, but it’s not hard to see why the Department of Justice chose to make a federal case out of this one.

Here’s the sequence of events:


December 2, 2015: Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik perpetrate the deadliest terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, leaving behind a locked iPhone the FBI can’t crack.

January 13: Apple’s hardened security measures come up at a Washington summit on strong crypto, CEO Tim Cook and Attorney General Loretta Lynch clash over “back doors.” Harsh words and warnings are exchanged.

February 9: Lynch requests an extra $38 million to help the FBI development workarounds on data encryption, bringing the total budget of what it calls “project Going Dark” to $69 million.

February 16: The DOJ takes Apple to court. Tim Cook responds, drawing a line in the sand.

There is much that I find duplicitous in the Justice’s Department’s latest brief in the case. That the FBI is only interested in this iPhone, no others. That what they’re asking for is not a back door. That larger issues of privacy are not at stake.

But what I find particularly hypocritical is the DOJ’s suggestion that Apple  AAPL 0.16%  is only concerned about its business model and public brand marketing strategy.

The FBI has a business model too. And with $38.3 million at stake, it knows a thing or two about public brand marketing.

[truth_seeker]

The main issue is 14 dead people, and Apple's refusal to comply with a lawful request, covered in the 4th Amendment--a "reasonable search & seizure."

The phone in question was owned by the employer, not the terrorist. I am certain the employer has authorized that it be decoded.

[sinkspur]

The main issue is 14 dead people, and Apple's refusal to comply with a lawful request, covered in the 4th Amendment--a "reasonable search & seizure."

The phone in question was owned by the employer, not the terrorist. I am certain the employer has authorized that it be decoded.

Doesnt' matter.  Forcing a business to build a product that doesn't exist is fascist.  Apple should stand on this and refuse to do it, period.

[Sanguine]

Interesting article, Sink.

[truth_seeker]

Historical information. During WWII the US auto industry stopped making cars, and instead made other war implements; tanks, etc.

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24088

"Question

Did the U.S. manufacture of automobiles come to a halt during World War II?

Answer

Yes, it halted completely. No cars, commercial trucks, or auto parts were made from February 1942 to October 1945.

On January 1, 1942, all sales of cars, as well as the delivery of cars to customers who had previously contracted for them, were frozen by the government’s Office of Production Management. As a temporary measure, local rationing boards could issue permits allowing persons who had contracted for cars before January 1st to secure delivery.

President Roosevelt established the War Production Board on January 16, 1942. It superseded the Office of Production Management. The WPB regulated the industrial production and allocation of war materiel and fuel. That included coordinating heavy manufacturing, and the rationing of vital materials, such as metals, rubber, and oil. It also established wage and price controls."

That was during a time when the US actually won wars.  There IS ample legal precedent to ask US based industrial concerns for important reasons.

[Bill Cipher]

The main issue is 14 dead people, and Apple's refusal to comply with a lawful request, covered in the 4th Amendment--a "reasonable search & seizure."

The phone in question was owned by the employer, not the terrorist. I am certain the employer has authorized that it be decoded.

Since Apple doesn't have the keys it's not in a position to just unlock the phone.  When it was in the past, Apple did cooperate and did unlock phones.  And this isn't World War II and conscripting apple's production capacity is not crucial to turning out the tanks and ships and planes and guns needed to win wwII.  There is no relevance there. 

[sinkspur]

Historical information. During WWII the US auto industry stopped making cars, and instead made other war implements; tanks, etc.

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24088

"Question

Did the U.S. manufacture of automobiles come to a halt during World War II?

Answer

Yes, it halted completely. No cars, commercial trucks, or auto parts were made from February 1942 to October 1945.

On January 1, 1942, all sales of cars, as well as the delivery of cars to customers who had previously contracted for them, were frozen by the government’s Office of Production Management. As a temporary measure, local rationing boards could issue permits allowing persons who had contracted for cars before January 1st to secure delivery.

President Roosevelt established the War Production Board on January 16, 1942. It superseded the Office of Production Management. The WPB regulated the industrial production and allocation of war materiel and fuel. That included coordinating heavy manufacturing, and the rationing of vital materials, such as metals, rubber, and oil. It also established wage and price controls."

That was during a time when the US actually won wars.  There IS ample legal precedent to ask US based industrial concerns for important reasons.

This is not one of those reasons.  You actually believe this guy--who destroyed his private phone--was communicating with Al Qaeda over a company-owned phone that could be confiscated at any time?

The product doesn't exist, ts.  Tanks and other munitions did exist.  The government was not forcing GM to build something that didn't already exist.

[HonestJohn]

Historical information. During WWII the US auto industry stopped making cars, and instead made other war implements; tanks, etc.

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24088

"Question

Did the U.S. manufacture of automobiles come to a halt during World War II?

Answer

Yes, it halted completely. No cars, commercial trucks, or auto parts were made from February 1942 to October 1945.

On January 1, 1942, all sales of cars, as well as the delivery of cars to customers who had previously contracted for them, were frozen by the government’s Office of Production Management. As a temporary measure, local rationing boards could issue permits allowing persons who had contracted for cars before January 1st to secure delivery.

President Roosevelt established the War Production Board on January 16, 1942. It superseded the Office of Production Management. The WPB regulated the industrial production and allocation of war materiel and fuel. That included coordinating heavy manufacturing, and the rationing of vital materials, such as metals, rubber, and oil. It also established wage and price controls."

That was during a time when the US actually won wars.  There IS ample legal precedent to ask US based industrial concerns for important reasons.

Those actions required a declaration of war by Congress.  A declaration of war grants powers to the President not allowed in time of peace.

[truth_seeker]

Those actions required a declaration of war by Congress.  A declaration of war grants powers to the President not allowed in time of peace.

We had the equivalent of war declaration after 9/11 and have done many things pursuent to it.

[HonestJohn]

We had the equivalent of war declaration after 9/11 and have done many things pursuent to it.

An equivalent is not the same as a declaration of war.  A formal declaration of war authorizes the President to do the following (this has been updated, but I cannot yet find the newest version):

To take over and operate enemy vessels for use in the war.

To regulate and prohibit exports.

To take over and operate the railroads.

To regulate priorities in transportation.

To regulate by a licensing system the importation, manufacture, storage, mining, or distribution of any necessaries.

To requisition foods, fuels, and other supplies necessary for any public use connected with national defense.

To fix a reasonable guaranteed price for wheat based upon a statutory minimum.

To fix the price of coal and to regulate the method of its production, sale, shipment, distribution, and storage.

To establish censorship of communications between the United States and any foreign country.

To prohibit or license business in the United States by foreign insurance companies.

---

Until Congress formally declares war, compelling US industry to produce goods (or a good, in this case) is not authorized.

[Bill Cipher]

We had the equivalent of war declaration after 9/11 and have done many things pursuent to it.

Truman wasn't allowed to seize the steel mills during the height of the korean war; how is conscripting Apple to create a GovOS more serious than that?

[17 Oaks]

We had the equivalent of war declaration after 9/11 and have done many things pursuent to it.

Truth, there are several sage posts here (HonestJohn, Bill Cipher, sinkspur etc) and they are valid.  Let me also add to that:  The US did not have a military-industrial complex at that time.  My dad was was in the Army ('34) was issued a BROOM in lieu of a rifle when he left the day after Pearl.  With luck he had his issue 1911 sidearm.  This is how bad a shape our military was in the day the Japs attacked.


We also had an America made of of Patriots unlike today and we had every company that had capacity knock on the Govt door to help, even Quaker Oats mfg M-1 Carbines.  Everyone joined in to fight the good fight.


I'm not the POTUS if I was we would have a DECLARED war against the radical Muslims, but we don't work in a world of equivalents, which sounds like something Obama would drool out of his mouth...