As the federal government continues to publicly chastise Apple for keeping their users’ data secure, Apple remains resilient in their act of civil disobedience — in spite of a court order filed on Friday against the tech giant.
Using the alleged San Bernardino shooter’s phone as the subject of their campaign, the feds are claiming that if Apple doesn’t create a backdoor through their encryption, then civilization, as we know it, will cease to exist.
John McAfee has even offered up his team’s hacking services to the FBI free of charge, as a means of allowing the phone in question to be accessed – without allowing the government to have a backdoor into all iPhones. He’s offered to eat his shoe if he fails. But, they’ve yet to accept.
A startling discovery on Friday, however, has just raised more questions about the FBI’s motives in wanting their backdoor to your data.
The password for the San Bernardino shooter’s iCloud account, which was associated with the phone confiscated by the FBI was reset —AFTER the government took possession of the phone.
The Justice Department confirmed that the password was changed, while in the possession of authorities, in its court filings.
The FBI is conveniently pointing the finger to the San Bernardino Health Department, claiming that a rogue employee acted on his own to reset the password.
However, had that password not been changed, the government would not have had to demand that Apple create a backdoor to access the phone of Syed Rizwan Farook.
Apple could have recovered information from the iPhone had the iCloud password not been reset, the company said. If the phone was taken to a location where it recognized the Wi-Fi network, such as the San Bernardino shooters’ home, it could have been backed up to the cloud, Apple suggested.
According to ABC News,
The development comes as the Justice Department is pushing forward with its legal fight against Apple, urging a federal judge to compel the tech giant to help the FBI crack open an iPhone left behind by Farook.
As the FBI masks their intrusive and unethical spying desires behind the tragic deaths in the San Bernardino shooting, their real intentions are being exposed.
As McAfee wrote in his eye-opening op-ed this week, “No matter how you slice this pie, if the government succeeds in getting this back door, it will eventually get a back door into all encryption, and our world, as we know it, is over.”
Make no mistake that this is one of the most epic battles in the history of privacy, as the decisions that are reached in this case will reverberate throughout the world and have far reaching consequences. There is a fundamental battle taking place as to whether an individual has a right to privacy or, if as the U.S. government is asserting; privacy is a privilege bestowed upon individuals at the behest of the government.
Ironically, privacy is considered a fundamental human right as recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. Privacy is the lynchpin of human dignity and many other key values such as freedom of association and freedom of speech have their roots in privacy.
When the U.S. government works to undermine what is considered a fundamental human right by most of the world, perhaps it’s time to seriously question why those elected to represent the people are actively working to undermine the rights of those that put them in office.
Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world.