Court-Ordered Access to Smart Phones: In Brief – Kristin Finklea, Specialist in Domestic Security; Richard M. Thompson II, Legislative Attorney; Chris Jaikaran, Analyst in Cybersecurity Policy. February 23, 2016.
“The tension between the benefits and challenges of encryption has been an issue for law enforcement and policy makers since the 1990s, and was reinvigorated in 2014 when companies like Apple and Google implemented automatic enhanced encryption on mobile devices and certain communications systems. Companies using such strong encryption do not maintain “back door” keys and, therefore, now cannot easily unlock, or decrypt, the devices—not even when presented with a valid legal order. Law enforcement concerns about the lack of back door keys were highlighted by the November and December 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, France, and San Bernardino, CA . Questions arose as to whether the attackers used strong encryption and, more importantly, if they did, whether and how this might have hindered investigations. Following the December 2, 2015, terrorist attack in San Bernardino, CA, U.S. investigators recovered a cell phone reportedly used by one of the shooters. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI Director James B. Comey testified before Congress two months later, indicating that the Bureau was still unable to access the information on that device. On February 16, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ordered Apple to provide “reasonable technical assistance to assist law enforcement agents in obtaining access to the data” on the cell phone. The order directs Apple’s assistance to feature three components:

• bypass or disable the iPhone’s auto-erase after 10 incorrect passcode attempts function (even if the function has not been enabled);
• enable the FBI to electronically input passcodes for testing; and
• ensure there is no added delay between passcode attempts…”