It’s never been easier for the cops to break into your phone

🌈 Abstract

The article discusses the FBI's ability to access the phone of the shooter in the recent attempted assassination at a former President Trump rally in Pennsylvania. It examines the various tools and techniques law enforcement agencies use to extract data from phones, including devices like Cellebrite and GrayKey. The article also revisits the FBI's past attempts to compel tech companies like Apple to help break into encrypted phones, and the ongoing tensions between law enforcement and privacy/security concerns.

🙋 Q&A

[01] The FBI's Access to the Shooter's Phone

1. What are the key details about the FBI's access to the shooter's phone?

• The FBI announced it "gained access" to the shooter's phone just two days after the attempted assassination at the Trump rally in Pennsylvania.
• The FBI initially tried and failed to break into the phone at the field office in Pennsylvania, but was then able to access it after sending the device to the FBI lab in Quantico, Virginia.
• Security experts say the speed with which the FBI was able to access the phone points to the increased efficacy of phone-hacking tools available to law enforcement.

2. What are some of the tools and techniques law enforcement uses to extract data from phones?

• Law enforcement agencies have access to mobile device extraction tools (MDTFs) like Cellebrite, which are designed for extracting data from phones.
• More advanced tools like GrayKey, which can cost between $15,000 and $30,000, also provide law enforcement the ability to break into modern smartphones.
• The FBI likely has its own in-house tools and techniques in addition to using third-party MDTFs.

3. How does the FBI's ability to access the shooter's phone compare to past cases where they struggled to break into encrypted devices?

• In the past, the FBI has spent weeks or months trying to break into suspects' phones, as seen in the San Bernardino and Pensacola shootings where they clashed with Apple over encryption.
• However, in this recent case, the FBI was able to access the shooter's phone much more quickly, suggesting their phone-hacking capabilities have become more advanced.

[02] The FBI's Battles with Tech Companies over Encryption

1. What was the key dispute between the FBI and Apple over the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone?

• After the 2015 San Bernardino shooting, the FBI tried to compel Apple to help them break into the shooter's iPhone, which Apple refused to do.
• Apple argued that creating a "backdoor" to bypass the iPhone's encryption would undermine the security and privacy of all its users.
• The FBI eventually found an "outside source" to unlock the phone without Apple's help, but the case highlighted the ongoing tensions between law enforcement and tech companies over encryption.

2. How did the FBI respond when Apple refused to help unlock phones after other shootings?

• After the 2019 Pensacola Naval Air Station shooting, the FBI again asked Apple to unlock the shooter's iPhones, which Apple refused.
• The FBI was eventually able to break into the phones, but criticized Apple for not providing "substantive assistance" in the case.
• This was seen as one of the last times federal law enforcement agencies publicly denounced encryption, as the technology and tools on both sides have continued to evolve since then.

3. What are the broader concerns around the availability of phone-hacking tools?

• Experts note there are "serious human rights risks" when powerful phone-hacking technology is available to undemocratic governments, not just law enforcement in democratic countries.
• The widespread availability of these tools, even from third-party vendors, raises concerns about how they could be misused to violate individual privacy and security.