[conspire] Order to Compel Apple to Assist With SB Shooter Unlock

[Rick Moen]

Back on Feb. 18, I wrote:

> US Assistant AG Eileen Decker is quoted as saying 'We have made a solemn
> commitment to the victims and their families that we will leave no stone
> unturned as we gather as much information and evidence as possible.'
> Evidence in what case, Ms. Decker?  Are you prosecuting the corpses of
> Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik?  This does nothing for the
> 14 victims and their families; it's just a Federal fishing expedition
> where they don't even know what they're looking for but just want to
> dragnet a bunch of data to trace connections and see what they can dig
> up.  (I'm not necessarily opposed to them doing so; I just find the
> doublespeak tiresome.)

So, after all that:

1.  FBI dropped the 'Order Compelling Apple Inc. to Assist Agents in
Search' legal action
(https://cryptome.org/2016/04/usg-apple-madc-006.pdf) and bought
outsourced iPhone 5c unlocking services from an unnamed 'international
firm':  https://cryptome.org/2016/03/usg-apple-209.pdf

2.  Recently, FBI admitted to CBS News that, er, sorry, there was
nothing of interest on the 'phone.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/source-nothing-significant-found-on-san-bernardino-iphone/

3.  Despite a legally mandated disclosure process called the
Vulnerabilities Equities Process that requires government agencies to
disclose vulnerabilities discovered by government agencies because, duh,
other agencies and people will also need to fix them, FBI seemingly
_cannot_ do so in this case, because the unnamed 'international firm' 
never disclosed the crack, only sold its services using it.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-whitehouse-idUSKCN0XB05D
FBI chief James Comey claims the crack works only on model 5C running iOS 9.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-hired-professional-hackers-in-san-bernardino-iphone-cracking-case/

Persistent Internet rumour claimed the 'international firm' was Israeli
company Cellebrite.  Bruce Schneier has cited reasons why he doubts this:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/03/fbi_vs_apple_wh.html


Meanwhile, similar cases keep coming up and the notion of compelling
technology companies to 'assist' law enforcement (including broad and
sweeping orders under the 1789 All Writs Act) seems to be gaining
traction, with the limits of the 'assistance' to be determined by
courtroom gladiatoral contests.
http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report-fbi-pushes-apple-on-iphone-access-in-two-more-cases-2200661