"The FBI has now successfully
retrieved the data stored on the San Bernardino terrorist's iPhone and
therefore no longer requires the assistance from Apple," a Justice
Department spokeswoman said.
FBI breaks into San Bernardino gunman's iPhone without Apple's
help, ending court case
The U.S. Justice Department announced Monday it has successfully accessed data stored on the iPhone that belonged to the San Bernardino gunman without Apple's help, ending the court case against the tech company.
The surprise development effectively ends a pitched court battle between Apple and the Obama administration.
The government asked a federal judge to vacate a disputed order forcing Apple to help the FBI break into the iPhone, saying it was no longer necessary.
The court filing in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California provided no details about how the FBI did it or who showed it how. Apple did not immediately comment on the development.
“As the government noted in its filing today, the FBI has now successfully retrieved the data stored on the San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone and therefore no longer requires the assistance from Apple required by this Court Order," DOJ spokeswoman Melaine Newman said in a statement. "The FBI is currently reviewing the information on the phone, consistent with standard investigatory procedures."
A law enforcement official said Monday night that DOJ no longer requires the assistance of Apple in unlocking the iPhone that belonged to San Bernardino gunman Syed Farook given that the third party method demonstrated to FBI earlier this month proved successful.
The official added that the decision to request that the order compelling Apple to assist FBI be vacated by the court for that same reason.
The law enforcement official said that FBI is currently reviewing the information on Farook’s iPhone and that the bureau will continue to explore every lead to make sure that all evidence in the San Bernardino terror attack is collected. The official would not comment on what FBI may have found on the phone as of now.
The official would not disclose any details about the method used to unlock the phone or the third party that demonstrated this method to FBI, only noting that the third party was outside the government.
The surprise development also punctured the temporary perception that Apple's security might have been good enough to keep consumers' personal information safe even from the U.S. government — with the tremendous resources it can expend when it wants to uncover something.
The FBI used the technique to access data on an iPhone used by gunman Syed Farook, who died with his wife in a gun battle with police after they killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in December.
U.S. magistrate Sheri Pym of California last month ordered Apple to provide the FBI with software to help it hack into Farook's work-issued iPhone. The order touched off a debate pitting digital privacy rights against national security concerns.
Apple was headed for a courtroom showdown with the government last week, until federal prosecutors abruptly asked for a postponement so they could test a potential solution that was brought to them by an unidentified party the previous weekend.
Technical experts had said there might be a few ways an outsider could gain access to the phone, although the FBI had insisted repeatedly until then that only Apple had the ability to override the iPhone's security.
The case drew international attention and highlighted a growing friction between governments and the tech industry. Apple and other tech companies have said they feel increasing need to protect their customers' data from hackers and unfriendly intruders, while police and other government authorities have warned that encryption and other data-protection measures are making it more difficult for investigators to track criminals and dangerous extremists.
The withdrawal of court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request details on the method the FBI used. Apple attorneys said last week that they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful.
The encrypted phone was protected by a passcode that included security protocols: a time delay and self-destruct feature that erased the phone's data after 10 tries. The two features made it impossible for the government to repeatedly and continuously test passcodes in what's known as a brute-force attack.
As to whether DOJ will apply this method to other cases involving locked iPhones, a law enforcement official said Monday night that FBI is focused on the San Bernardino case and that they could not comment on the possibility of future disclosures at this time.
The official added that it would be premature to say anything about DOJ’s ability to access other phones through this method at this point, only adding that FBI knows that it works on the iPhone 5C that belonged to the San Bernardino gunman which was running iOS 9.
On working with Apple going forward, the official said that the goal has always been to work cooperatively with Apple and that DOJ will want to continue to work with Apple in the future
FBI Opens San Bernardino Shooter’s iPhone; U.S. Drops Demand on Apple
The move signals a temporary retreat from a high-stakes fight between Washington and Silicon Valley over privacy and security in the digital age.
The filing short-circuits a pending legal showdown over whether the government can force technology companies to write software to aid in criminal investigations, but it is unlikely to avert the long-term conflict between federal agents and technology executives over how secure electronic communications should be, and what firms should have to do to help the government access their customers’ data.
The decision by federal officials to drop the case comes a week after prosecutors bowed out of a planned courtroom showdown, telling the magistrate judge in the case that they may have found a new way to access the phone without Apple’s help.
In Monday’s filing, prosecutors revealed the method had in fact worked and Apple’s assistance was no longer necessary.
Justice Department spokeswoman Melanie Newman said the FBI “is currently reviewing the information on the phone, consistent with standard investigatory procedures.”
She also signaled that while this particular phone is no longer at issue, the broader fight over encryption-protected technology is likely to continue. “It remains a priority for the government to ensure that law enforcement can obtain crucial digital information to protect national security and public safety, either with cooperation from relevant parties, or through the court system when cooperation fails. We will continue to pursue all available options for this mission, including seeking the cooperation of manufacturers and relying upon the creativity of both the public and private sectors,” she said.
An Apple spokesman didn’t immediately comment.
The dispute between technology companies such as Apple and the federal government has been brewing for more than a year. Firms increasingly have used encryption as a default setting for their products, and they have declined to help law-enforcement agencies open suspect devices in some cases.
That conflict came to a head in December, when investigators recovered the phone of Syed Rizwan Farook after he and his wife opened fire with rifles on a holiday office party in San Bernardino, killing 14 and injuring 22. Investigators couldn’t open the iPhone because of security features that don’t allow more than 10 guesses of an iPhone’s passcode.
The Justice Department eventually got a court order compelling Apple to help them bypass the passcode security features. The company fought the order, setting the stage for a possibly precedent-setting court fight on privacy.
As the two sides geared up for that fight, FBI officials said they had exhausted all possible avenues of getting into the phone before getting the court order against Apple.
In the public and legal debate that followed, the FBI argued the law doesn’t support a company making phones that are “warrant proof”—unable to be opened even with a signed order from a judge. Apple said it was fighting the order because to do what the FBI wanted would create a new security vulnerability for untold millions of iPhone users.
The filing doesn’t indicate what method the FBI used to access the data onthe phone, nor does it say what, if any, evidence related to the attacks was found on it.
Officials have been tight-lipped about who offered the FBI a solution to the technical challenge, and how. A person familiar with the case said the method wasn’t developed by a government agency, but by a private entity.
The government is still engaged in a broader fight with Apple over what role, if any, the company should play in helping investigators access data on their customers’ phones.
Previous court filings indicated prosecutors were seeking similar orders against Apple involving at least 15 phones seized as part of unrelated criminal investigations around the country.
State and local prosecutors, most notably Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, have also pressed technology companies to help detectives access data on suspects’ phones.
Fox News' Matt Dean and The
Associated Press contributed to this report.
Devlin Barrett