The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“SMARTPHONE SECURITY” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S1021-S1022 on Feb. 25, 2016.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
SMARTPHONE SECURITY
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, on December 2, 2015, 14 innocent souls in San Bernardino were gunned down in a violent act of terrorism, and it involved one of these, an iPhone. This item has become ubiquitous, and a lot of us carry them around in our pocket. Yet almost 3 months later, law enforcement has not been able to fully access the iPhone--the one used by the terrorists in gunning down these 14 people. The information on this particular iPhone could shed some light on how he planned the attack with his wife and would obviously give authorities an opportunity to see if others were involved in the attack. The contacts in that iPhone could indicate whether there were other terrorists in the United States or abroad who helped them in that attack. Yet 3 months after these murders, the FBI cannot access the contents of the iPhone because a security feature on the iPhone potentially erases its contents after 10 incorrect passwords are entered. The maker of the iPhone, Apple, says it would need to develop new software--software that it claims does not exist today--in order to disable that feature.
If this security feature were to be disabled by Apple, the FBI could use what it calls ``brute force attack,'' which is the ability to run different combinations of numbers through the iPhone in milliseconds, to try to assess the different password combinations in order to gain access to the iPhone, but they still don't have access even though the court is involved.
Last week a Federal magistrate judge ordered Apple to provide reasonable technical assistance to the FBI in order to provide access to the perpetrator's iPhone. Apple opposes this order, given the concerns that technology developed to intentionally weaken its security features could be abused if it is in the wrong hands. In other words, there would not be the privacy concern. They claim it would put smartphone users' data and privacy at risk. It is a legitimate argument. They also view the Federal magistrate judge's order as an example of government overreach.
Well, in response the Department of Justice filed a motion in district court to compel Apple to comply with the magistrate judge's order, and because of the complicated nature of the issues of national security, individual privacy, which we value, and First Amendment questions involved, there will no doubt be prolonged litigation that may ultimately have to be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court.
I certainly understand the risk to Americans' privacy, as expressed by Apple and other technology companies, but I don't want to run the risk of letting the trail go so cold on this terrorist attack--and potentially other similar cases--that we lose this valuable information all because this is winding itself through months and years in the courts. In other words, we need to know what was behind this attack. Everybody recognizes that this was a terrorist attack. We need to obtain this information in order to get to the bottom of it and root out and see if there are other terrorists in the country planning to do the same thing so we can protect our people and our national security. There has to be a way that the FBI can get the information it needs from the terrorist's iPhone in a manner that continues to protect American smartphone users.
Now, surely common sense can prevail here. This is why this Senator urges Apple and the FBI to work together in order to resolve the stalemate.
Let me go back over this again. We have a dead terrorist. He and his wife killed 14 Americans. We have that dead terrorist's iPhone, and we have a Federal judge's order that says we have the right to get that information in order to protect the Nation and its people. It is just like if we had this terrorist, dead or alive, and we needed to get an order to invade that person's privacy to get into their home and get evidence to protect the Nation from other terrorist attacks. There would certainly be no objection to that. The judge's order would be the protector of that privacy. This is a similar situation, except the FBI has an iPhone and they still can't get the information in it.
What if this terrorist were not an American citizen and this terrorist were illegally in the United States? Would the same standard apply? I think Apple would say yes. We can draw up the different scenarios, but the bottom line is we are going to have to protect our people. That is why this Senator urges Apple and the FBI to work together in order to resolve the stalemate. I understand that consideration must be given as far as the protection of privacy in people's iPhones. We have always found a way to balance our cherished right to privacy and our cherished right of securing ourselves and our national security, and that is what is needed in this case. The safety and security of our fellow Americans depend on it. Otherwise, when the next terrorist strikes--51 percent of Americans who have been surveyed today say they feel the government needs access to this information to protect against future attacks. If the next attack happens and information is on an iPhone, that 51 percent will soar and it will be very clear that the American people support the protection of our national security.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
____________________
