3 things you need to know about the war between Apple and the FBI

Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook has said abiding by the government’s request would mean creating the software equivalent of cancer.

The fight between the government and Apple Inc. over unlocking a San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone has gotten uglier with each salvo.

The Justice Department has accused Apple of creating “a diversion” by sounding alarms about security and privacy as part of a marketing ploy.

Apple disagrees. Bruce Sewell, Apple’s AAPL, +2.01%   general counsel, told reporters that “In 30 years of practice, I’ve never seen a legal brief more intended to smear the other side….It seems like disagreeing with the Justice Department must mean you’re evil and anti-American. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

It all started when a federal court in California ordered Apple to help the Federal Bureau of Investigation crack the iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooter who killed 14 people in December at a holiday gathering.Apple and government attorneys make their cases before the U.S. District Court for the District of Central California on March 22. Here are three things to keep in mind.

1. The FBI is trying to compel Apple to write a software that doesn’t exist right now.

This case has been boiled down to a simple question: Should Apple be forced to help the FBI unlock an iPhone used by a suspected terrorist? But it’s actually a bit more complicated.

The FBI is trying to unlock an iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook, who worked at the San Bernardino County Department of Health. The device at issue is an iPhone the county issued to him as a work phone. He had a personal phone, too, and destroyed that before the attack. The county has cooperated with the FBI and has given the agency permission to search the phone, but investigators have been paralyzed by several security features.

But the phone is locked with a passcode. County officials don’t know the passcode and Farook is dead, so they can’t get it from him. The phone also has a setting enabled that erases data if incorrect passwords are attempted 10 times. And on top of that, the phone introduces delays between each wrong password guess.

So the FBI wants Apple to write new software that it can load onto the phone that would kill the self-destruct function, as well as any delays when guessing passwords. It wants that software to allow for electronic password guesses so investigators don’t have to poke at the screen by hand.

U.S. prosecutors take aim at Apple again

(16:57)

The Justice Department criticized Apple for allegedly helping the Chinese government access customer phone data while refusing to assist U.S. agents.

Apple has turned over iCloud backups associated with the phone, but the most recent was in October, and the shooting occurred in December. (The company and the FBI have been arguing about whether the investigators fumbled any chances at obtaining a more recent backup by resetting the password within 24 hours of acquiring the device.) Apple says writing a new software for the government is a terrible idea for several reasons. For one, the company says if it abides by this request, it could set a precedent in which the government could ask — among other things — for Apple to allow investigators to spy on people through their iPhone cameras. Apple also says this could open up users to all kinds of security risks at a time when cyberattacks are already a growing threat.

2. Many doubt the iPhone in question contains any evidence.

San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan joined security and tech experts when he said he doubts there’s much of value on the phone everyone is fighting about anyway.

“I’ll be honest with you, I think that there is a reasonably good chance that there is nothing of any value on the phone,” he told NPR.

That’s because Farook took the time to destroy personal devices but not this employer-issued work phone. Many in the tech and security communities have doubted it contains evidence beyond what the FBI has already gathered from sources like iCloud backups and metadata, or the information about who was communicating and when. FBI Director Jim Comey has said the effort to unlock this phone is about completing as thorough an investigation as possible in hopes of gleaning any additional evidence because “we can’t look the survivors in the eye, or ourselves in the mirror, if we don’t follow this lead.”

3. This isn’t about just one phone.

The government has repeated in its court filings that its request pertains to just one phone but legal experts have agreed with Apple that each case sets precedent, which other courts rely on for future cases. Manhattan’s district attorney and other state and local officials have said they would follow the FBI’s example if it wins this case in pursuit of unlocking other iPhones. And Jim Comey himself admitted at a hearing on Capitol Hill last month that the case could set a precedent.