[fleitz]

Well, if they aren't being asked to build a tool, then there's nothing for them to help the FBI with because the device functions as designed.

It is precisely the design of the device that the FBI wants Apple to alter using some sort of tool that Apple will make for them.

[icebraining]

My point was just that the FBI didn't ask Apple to "build a tool for the FBI that will allow them to look at any user's data". They asked Apple to prevent some security mechanisms of that particular device from working. Whether Apple builds a tool or uses manual labour with existing tools to do so is irrelevant for the FBI.

[osi]

What IS relevant for the FBI is establishing legal precedent under the Writs act for compelling them to do so.

[zaphar]

The point that gets lost here is that it's close to impossible for Apple to build a tool that will only allow them to look at any users data. Once the tool exists it's a simple hexedit away from working on anyones phone. While the court may be asking for something single use that same court may not understand the full implications of what they are asking. Thus the need for a public discourse on the topic.

[icebraining]

It's not an hexedit away because Apple won't have to provide it to the Feds, hence they can still demand a court order each and every time. Except for the cost, it's no different than if they had to re-build it every time.

[jsutton]

They haven't explicitly asked for that specifically, but that would be the consequence of fulfilling the request.