FBI likely to back down against Apple after major claim exposed as false

THIS whole time the FBI claimed it was at the mercy of Apple’s engineers. It turns out, they were likely playing for something else.

FILE - In this Tuesday, Feb. 23, 2016, file photo, protesters carry placards outside an Apple store in Boston. Tech companies, security experts and civil liberties groups are filing court briefs supporting Apple in its battle with the FBI. The groups oppose a judge’s order that would require Apple to help federal agents hack an encrypted iPhone used by a San Bernardino mass shooter. (AP Photo/Steven Senne, File)

IT SEEMS the jig is up for the FBI.

The US law enforcement agency is reportedly on the brink of backing down in a heated battle with Apple after its core argument was exposed as a fallacy.

The FBI has been trying to persuade a US judge to force Apple to comply with a court order to build an iPhone operating software that can be hacked by agents. Despite having the weight and resources of the world’s most powerful government at its disposal, the FBI claimed it was unable to hack the phone used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook.

But not everyone was buying it.

Former analyst and NSA leaker Edward Snowden called the FBI’s claim “bullsh*t” to a room full of people at a conference in Washington this month.

Millionaire programmer and the man responsible for the first commercial anti-virus program, John McAfee, also rubbished the apparent admission of technical impotence saying, “The FBI is trying to fool the American public.”

The implication was that the FBI was using the high profile case in an effort to set a legal precedent it could use to force tech companies to comply with future investigations.

It turns out, there was probably something to the allegation.

According to court documents from the case released this week, an outside party has shown a way in which the iPhone can be hacked without the assistance of Apple.

“On Sunday, March 20, 2016, an outside party demonstrated to the FBI a possible method for unlocking Farook’s iPhone,” the court documents read. “If the method is viable, it should eliminate the need for the assistance from Apple Inc. set forth in the All Writs Act Order in this case.”

The court order that Apple had originally refused to comply with was not a subpoena, but rather an obscure 1789 law known as the All Writs Act invoked by the FBI — the legitimacy of which was at the heart of the current legal dispute.

The law requires that there be a strong necessity for the requested assistance but this latest development means such an argument would be exceedingly difficult to make.

The fact that a third party may have found a way into the phone without Apple’s help appears to contradict every sworn affidavit and filing put forward in the last month by the US Justice Department.

“The government just moved to vacate tomorrow’s hearing in Apple v FBI,” US lawyer and digital civil liberties advocate Nate Cardozo tweeted this morning. “Seems they’re abandoning this as a test case!”

“This is a total win for us. This was FBI’s hand-chosen case, and now they’re forced to back off,” he wrote.

Judge Sheri Pym has granted time for the government to determine whether the third party technique is viable and ordered the FBI to file a status report by April 5.

If the FBI does indeed abandon its effort to force Apple to comply, it will be seen as a massive victory for tech companies and privacy advocates alike.

Apple looks like prevailing in the legal showdown.