Apple's encryption battle with the FBI is not yet done
A US court have now ordered Apple to crack an iPhone in another case in the name of fighting crime. Apple still are firm on their decision. A US magistrate court in Massachusetts has signed a court order demanding Apple to retrive content in the form of text messages, pictures along with other data from their cloud servers uploaded through the culprit's iPhone last year to help police investigate suspected gang crimes according to a document uploaded online by the ACLU.
The report however did not reveal whether Apple have compiled with the order and Apple did not come out with a statement regarding the same. Looks like Apple wants to stay hold of its ground.
The new case surfaced as the US federal government on friday as the Department of Justice have now kept their encryption battle with Apple compelling the Cueprtino tech-giants to help crack their phones in a drug case in New York. The move by the Justice Department comes after a stonrg courtroom lockdown between Apple and the FBI over access to the iPhone of a Californian gunman came to an unforseen halt, when investigators said they had extracted the data on their own. Most concerned questions still remain about law enforcement offficials were able to take access to devices with strong encryption balance with user privacy rights and the same could be answered if the government's case in New York goes forward.
"The government continues to require Apple's assistance in accessing the data that it is authorized to search by warrant," Justice Department lawyers told US District Court Judge Margo Brodie in a written filing. Meanwhile, lawyers for Apple were again fuming with what appeared to be a new appeal by the United states government an a new attempt and a new troubling legal precedent for fighting crime.
Apple attorneys said they planned to counter-appeal the government's stance in the New York case by stressing in court to find out whether it has done everything possible without the company's help to get the data it seeks and by continuing to argue the request is not backed by the law.
