What am I missing?

[Johan Wevers]

On 30-03-2016 15:46, Robert J. Hansen wrote:

>> The FBI wanted clearly an easy access to ALL devices and a court ruling
>> to force other companies into compliance...

> I try not to get involved in conspiracy theories, but this one's just...
> outrageous.

Why would this be an outragious conspiracy theory? What could the FBI
possibly find in that phone that would be so important? Nothing for a
court case because the owner was already dead, and they already ghave
the records who he called with the device, they can be obtained from the
carrier.

> So, let's assume the FBI wanted a court ruling to force other companies
> into compliance.  Which makes more sense?  To take on a
> multibillion-dollar and much-beloved company like Apple and fight their
> entire legal department to get a court precedent it can then use to
> force smaller guys into compliance...

The smaller company would probably not have gone to court over it and
just complied, so it would not set a legal precedent. Or it would just
have closed itself, like Lavabit.

> ... or would they take on a small company that can't put up as much of a
> legal fight and wouldn't get as much publicity?  And then, having won
> that, go to Apple and say "we have precedent on our side"?

That's probably their next step. They just have to wait for the right
moment, i.e. a terrorist, child molester or serial killer case with a
locked device.

> Your idea works only if you assume the FBI is pathologically stupid.

I won't rule that out either, but I was not assuming it.

-- 
ir. J.C.A. Wevers
PGP/GPG public keys at http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/pgpkeys.html