Ricoh eDiscovery

Five Articles to Provide Some Insight on Apple's Discovery Battle with the FBI.

Posted by Marketing |3 minute read

Feb 23, 2016 2:17:40 PM

Earlier this month, a US Federal Judge ordered Apple to help the FBI unlock the iPhone used by one of the shooters who carried out the Dec. 2 terrorist attacks in San Bernardino, California. Within hours, Apple's Chief Executive, Tim Cook, declared that he would fight the government’s “unprecedented” demands.

iPhone_Passcode.jpg

David Greetham, VP of Ediscovery Operations of Ricoh Americas, is a Certified Computer Crime Investigator with an extensive background in forensic collection. With this unique and highly-qualified perspective, he had this to say about the case:

"Apple has taken a stance with the FBI and court’s insistence that they provide the back-end entry access to facilitate decryption options on an assumed terrorist’s iPhone for several reasons.

Apple claims that they do not currently have the tools to accomplish this, and would have to commit time, as well as unbudgeted finances, to develop something that could facilitate this request.

Secondly, and most significantly, if Apple allows the demand to override their client’s perceived right to privacy and provide a solution for this demand, how can this be managed going forward? What criteria can be used to ascertain if this should be done again in the future? While everyone agrees it is egregious to neglect assistance in the prevailing of justice with known terrorists, what happens in the case of a suspected terrorist? Who makes the judgment call and based on what information? I think this dilemma may be partially driving Apple’s stance."

With Greetham's help, we have gathered five articles that provide some perspective on the discovery implications of this complicated case:

  1. Apple vows to resist FBI demand to crack iPhone linked to San Bernardino attacks (Washington Post, Feb 17, 2016)

  2. Encription, Terrorism and Privacy on Trial (ACEDS, Feb 18, 2016)

  3. San Bernardino Shooter's iCloud Password Changed While iPhone was in Government Possession (ABC News, Feb 19, 2016)

  4. Apple vs. the FBI Is Really, Really Complicated (Harvard Business Review, Feb 19, 2016)

  5. John McAfee blasts FBI for ‘illiterate’ order to create Apple iPhone backdoor (RT America Exclusive, Feb 23, 2016)

The question is, if Apple opens this can of worms and complies with the court order giving the FBI what they want, what criteria is then used to determine when they can do it again? Is a possible solution for the FBI to give the phone to Apple perhaps?

Only time will tell...

Topics: Intelligent Review

   

Tell Us What You Think.