Jadzia Butler, Privacy, Surveillance & Security Fellow at the Center for Democracy & Technology talks about the FBI and Apple testimony on Capital Hill about the San Bernadino shooter's iPhone.
Apple and the FBI taking their case to Capitol Hill represented as. Take testifying before congressional panel on whether apple should open the phone of one of the San Bernardino shooters. Yeah I sub Butler privacy surveillance and security fellow at the Center for Democracy and Technology. Was watching the hearing she joins us with more from DC great to have you. Thanks good to be here. OK so how successful has FBI director James coming been in his testimony from your assessment. My assessment is spending he's not really being that successful or persuasive he's only repeating the same old tired arguments that we've heard time and again. Those arguments are that the government somehow has the authority to compel apple. To create a new software that will undermine the security that it is built into its own devices. And that the government can do this based on it 200 into one year old statute I don't think. Representatives on the dollar buying it today to be honest well that's that he used to strike very conciliatory. It seems. You know talking about the importance of cooperation. Between the government and between companies and protecting privacy but still having security. Not successful in your your mind now. Now because apple has been cooperating with the FBI repeatedly the only reason they've had to go this route is because the FBI and the county messed up. With out going through apple they remotely change that I clap past heard of this device. If they hadn't done that they would have been able to take this iPhone to a location where it could've been connected to Wi-Fi. They could have backed up the iPhone and apple could have then access that data. Because they didn't go that route now they have to resort to this ancient statue. He was asked about that and did admit that out Apple's General Counsel. Arguing that basically by creating tools unlock the phone it's gonna be in the history of security of hundreds of millions of apple devices. Is that going to be the dominant and more successful argument today. It really should be. The fact of the matter is this is not just about one time oneself found. First of all they are ready asking for apple to comply with additional orders that are very similar to this one and very soon you'll be hearing from New York estate attorney Cyrus Vance who has RD sat in the testimony that he submitted that he wants this same ruling to a fight 275. Other cellphones that he has on hand. But also wants apple creates this master key. Other hackers other governments other governments that we may not trust his matches we trust her own. Are going to wanna use the same the same software so ultimately if apple creates it just this one time it's going to create a Frankenstein monster that is only going to get worse. And what happens we have a testimony today where is congressional well. What exactly happens after this testimony is over with the next step. Well after this testimony is over I know that there will be other hearings I think energy and commerce is actually planning on having their own hearing on this issue. In terms of what happens in California we'll have to see we do know that right now. New York judge has actually ruled that the all writs act does not apply here and does not enable the government. See you force apple to create software like this that obviously want. Hi it will be appealed to the second circuit. But it won't apply here because we're in California however I do believe that that case is persuasive and that any judge that hears and the ninth circuit is probably going to have to listen to that argument. Partly to thank you so much. I think you got to have Butler privacy surveillance and security Allah at the Center for Democracy and Technology and not here now this is Reuters.