BATTLE OVER PRIVACY: Why the FBI’s Case Against Apple is Falling ApartShawn Helton 21st Century WireThis week a House Judiciary Committee began overseeing details of a US Federal Court case between tech company Apple and the FBI.On February 16th, Apple CEO Tim Cook publicly rejected a court order to decrypt an iPhone said to be connected to the San Bernardino mass-shooting case from December of 2015.The House Judiciary Committee listened to the controversial case between tech titan Apple and the FBI a day after Magistrate Judge James Orenstein of New York, struck down a federal court order pressuring Apple to help access encrypted data in a separate case involving illegal drug trafficking.The landmark decision made by Judge Orenstein stated that the All Writs Act of 1789 (also used as the FBI s main argument in the Apple/San Bernardino case) does not permit a court to order companies to pull encrypted data off a customer s phone or tablet,  according to a recent article from The Washington Post.The Post continued by discussing Orenstein s lengthy argument against the FBI s order against Apple in the drug related case: In a 50-page opinion disdainful of the government s arguments, Orenstein found that the All Writs Act does not apply in instances where Congress had the opportunity but failed to create an authority for the government to get the type of help it was seeking, such as having firms ensure they have a way to obtain data from encrypted phones. In addition, The Post outlined some of the social engineering aspects involved in the lead up to the FBI drug case overseen by Judge Orenstein, a case which has arguably been a part of an overarching back drop concerning the larger San Bernardino case: The Brooklyn case began last fall when Orenstein, one of a handful of magistrates across the country who are activists in the surveillance debate, received the government s application to issue an order to Apple. While Apple has previously helped the federal government with some 70 phone cases since 2008, Judge Orenstein examined several problems with the FBI s use of the All Writs Act: In an Oct. 9 ruling, Orenstein identified what he thought was a problem with the government s argument. Though prosecutors cited a 1985 decision that found that the All Writs Act is a source of authority to issue writs  not otherwise covered by statute,  he said they failed to cite another part of the decision that found that the act does not authorize the issuance of  ad hoc writs whenever compliance with statutory procedures appears inconvenient or less appropriate. The new ruling in the FBI drug case will likely have a heavy impact on the eventual ruling in the San Bernardino/Apple court order, as it directly questions the heart of the government s argument to gain easier access to encrypted consumer data.It s also interesting to note, that it was the FBI who put themselves in this position regarding the San Bernardino phone as they reportedly ordered the password to be reset via iCloud shortly after the apparent mass shooting.You have to wonder why the agency would have ordered a new password almost immediately following the highly dramatic scene in San Bernardino   INVENTIONS OF REALITY?    Is this latest  privacy crisis  a manufactured drama or a legitimate battle for those in the tech industry? (Photo illustration 21WIRE)What s interesting here, is that ABC news reported on December 3rd, a day after the apparent shooting,  Sources say mobile phones, hard drives, virtually anything with digital memory that was associated with the alleged shooters   Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik   was smashed. Adding to that, we ve mentioned a number of times here at 21WIRE, that none of the eyewitness testimony mentioned seeing a female shooter at the scene of the Inland Regional Center in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting.A Right to PrivacyIn our previous article detailing the ongoing encryption saga between Apple and the FBI, we stated that there are no guarantees in the security world, especially if a digital master-key were to be created, as this would potentially make it easier for invaders (either the government, or various hackers) mining for data moving forward into the future.In a recent Guardian article, some of those involved in the technology and security sector offered their thoughts regarding the government s continued encroachment on individual privacy:Dan Kaminsky, the security expert who made his name with the discovery that one of the most basic parts of the internet, the domain name system, was vulnerable to fraud   disagrees:  Feds want final authority on engineering decisions, and their interests don t even align with fighting the vast bulk of real-world crime. Kaminsky further explained why Apple s security measures already help law enforcement, If my iPhone is stolen, my emails stay unread, my photos stay unviewed, and I don t need to notify anyone that the secrets they entrusted me with are going to show up on the internet tomorrow. Continuing, The Guardian interviewed former FBI agent Michael German, currently at judicial think-tank the Brennan Center. The following is a portion of that interview: After 9/11, you had this concept of total information awareness. The intelligence community was very enamoured of the idea that all information was available. Much like the NSA, they wanted to see it all, collect it all, and analyse it all. Additionally, there are many who believe weaker encryption may pose an even bigger security risk globally.In many ways, it appears as though federal agencies are seemingly searching for the right crisis to push public opinion in favor of the state when it comes to security.This is at the core of the perpetual privacy and security battle post 9/11   TARGETING PRIVACY    FBI Director James Comey speaking at the Brookings Institution in October of 2014 about Going Dark. (Photo link brookings)Shining a Light on the FBI  Going Dark Last September, The Washington Post published an article entitled, Obama faces growing momentum to support widespread encryption,   and within its contents, perhaps the true nature of the security/privacy issue was laid bare (hat tip saperetic): Privately, law enforcement officials have acknowledged that prospects for congressional action this year are remote. Although  the legislative environment is very hostile today,  the intelligence community s top lawyer, Robert S. Litt, said to colleagues in an August e-mail, which was obtained by The Post,  it could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement. There is value, he said, in  keeping our options open for such a situation. Interestingly, in October of 2014, FBI Director James B. Comey, explained while speaking at the Brookings Institution he was  focused on trying to get the law changed  so that tech companies would have to comply with law enforcement to unlock data on various devices.Continuing, he outlined the current security agenda concerning the FBI,  We have the legal authority to intercept and access communications and information pursuant to a court order, but we often lack the technical ability to do that. The Brookings speech from 2014, appeared in stark contrast with a recent emotionally driven op-ed Comey wrote for Lawfare entitled  We Could Not Look the Survivors in the Eye if We Did Not Follow this Lead. Here s a passage from that piece, that clearly displays the conflicting message of the FBI director: We simply want the chance, with a search warrant, to try to guess the terrorist s passcode without the phone essentially self-destructing and without it taking a decade to guess correctly. That s it. We don t want to break anyone s encryption or set a master key loose on the land. The Guardian refers to this as a  two-pronged approach  on the public s senses   as one tone from the FBI comes across as caring and the other seems more focused on the greater, nationalistic implications of encryption.Think good cop/bad cop hovering over you in an interrogation room and you d be getting very warm.This is the kind of psychological drama that has prompted some in media to think that the law enforcement agency has been exploiting the public in the wake of tragedy, in order to increase security measures.This is absolutely something to watch.So, what are we to make of the FBI s claims of going dark in the digital age?It has long since been claimed that intelligence agencies fear going dark in the age of high-tech gadgetry. This idea is vastly overblown and not rooted in reality, especially when you consider the many revelations concerning NSA spying, collection of bulk metadata and other tracking programs such as the IMSI catcher, otherwise known as Stingray (Stingray acts as cell tower locking onto all devices in a certain area) intercepts phone calls, texts, as well as your location.The very notion that law enforcement will somehow be condemned eternally to outdated methods to catch criminals in the future   is patently absurd.Furthermore, the concept and presentation of the FBI s  going dark  scenario is nothing more than a talking point used to increase a police state apparatus within the United States.Don t PanicOn February 1st, a group of experts published report regarding the current status of law enforcement and their ability to keep up with the demands of crime solving in the world today. The lengthy report entitled  Don t Panic was compiled by The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Here s a passage below examining the FBI s catchy mantra,  Going Dark :The U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities view this trend with varying degrees of alarm, alleging that their interception capabilities are  going dark.  As they describe it, companies are increasingly adopting technological architectures that inhibit the government s ability to obtain access to communications, even in circumstances that satisfy the Fourth Amendment s warrant requirements. Encryption is the hallmark of these architectures. Government officials are concerned because, without access to communications, they fear they may not be able to prevent terrorist attacks and investigate and prosecute criminal activity. Their solution is to force companies to maintain access to user communications and data, and provide that access to law enforcement on demand, pursuant to the applicable legal process. However, the private sector has resisted. Critics fear that architectures geared to guarantee such access would compromise the security and privacy of users around the world, while also hurting the economic viability of U.S. companies. They also dispute the degree to which the proposed solutions would truly prevent terrorists and criminals from communicating in mediums resistant to surveillance.While the report states that encryption is a difficult issue for law enforcement, all sorts of digital data is unencrypted and therefore can be accessed via a search warrant if there is cause   not to mention the spying capabilities of a plethora of smart devices also available for review.Below is FBI Director (former Senior Vice President at Lockheed Martin) discussing the idea that the government is Going Dark In an article entitled  Here s Why the FBI Went After Apple When It Did,  Fortune magazine revealed that on February 9th, DOJ head Loretta Lynch requested  an extra $38 million to help the FBI development workarounds on data encryption, bringing the total budget of what it calls  project Going Dark  to $69 million. Will the FBI continue to develop  encryption workarounds  in the event that they lose their battle with Apple over the San Bernardino case?In Summary Regardless of how you shape the court battle between Apple and the FBI, this is about the government wanting a more direct route into personal devices moving ahead.For Apple, this is a very important issue as a dip in consumer confidence, could be a crushing blow to the tech company s overall brand.It s important to remember anomaly ridden events such as the San Bernardino shooting and the suspicious events in Garland, Texas, of last year, in addition to other inconvenient truths concerning the government s role in manufacturing its own terror plots   which have ironically prompted calls for greater national security, while continuing to appropriate large funds to federal agencies.You have to wonder, has the FBI s case against Apple fallen apart?READ MORE ENCRYPTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Encryption FilesMiddle-east
battle over privacy why fbi case against apple falling apartshawn hilton century wirethis week house judiciary committee began overseeing details us federal court case tech company apple february apple ceo tim cook publicly rejected court order crypt iphone said connected san bernardino case december house judiciary committee listened controversial case tech titan apple fbi day magistrate judge james wenstein new york struck federal court order pressing apple help access encrypted data separate case involving illegal drug landmark decision made judge wenstein stated all write act also used fbi main argument bernardino case permit court order companies pull encrypted data customer phone tablet according recent article the washington post continued discussing wenstein lengthy argument fbi order apple drug related case in opinion disdainful government arguments wenstein found all write act apply instances congress opportunity failed create authority government get type help seeking firms ensure way obtain data encrypted phones in addition the post outlined social engineering aspects involved lead fbi drug case overseen judge wenstein case arguably part overarching back drop concerning larger san bernardino case the brooklyn case began last fall wenstein one handful magistrates across country activists surveillance debate received government application issue order apple while apple previously helped federal government phone cases since judge wenstein examined several problems fbi use all write act in ruling wenstein identified thought problem government argument though prosecutors cited decision found all write act source authority issue write otherwise covered statute said failed cite another part decision found act authorize issuance ad hoc write whenever compliance statutory procedures appears inconvenient less appropriate the new ruling fbi drug case likely heavy impact eventual ruling san court order directly questions heart government argument gain easier access encrypted consumer also interesting note fbi put position regarding san bernardino phone reportedly ordered password reset via cloud shortly apparent mass wonder agency would ordered new password almost immediately following highly dramatic scene san bernardino inventions of reality is latest privacy crisis manufactured drama legitimate battle tech industry photo illustration what interesting abc news reported december day apparent shooting sources say mobile phones hard drives virtually anything digital memory associated alleged shooters seed maroon tashfeen malik smashed adding mentioned number times none eyewitness testimony mentioned seeing female shooter scene inland regional center aftermath san bernardino right privacy previous article detailing ongoing encryption saga apple fbi stated guarantees security world especially digital created would potentially make easier invaders either government various hackers mining data moving forward recent guardian article involved technology security sector offered thoughts regarding government continued encroachment individual privacy dan kaminsky security expert made name discovery one basic parts internet domain name system vulnerable fraud disagrees feds want final authority engineering decisions interests even align fighting vast bulk crime kaminsky explained apple security measures already help law enforcement if iphone stolen emails stay undead photos stay reviewed i need notify anyone secrets entrusted going show internet tomorrow continuing the guardian interviewed former fbi agent michael german currently judicial brennan center the following portion interview after concept total information awareness the intelligence community enamoured idea information available much like nsa wanted see collect analyse additionally many believe weaker encryption may pose even bigger security risk many ways appears though federal agencies seemingly searching right crisis push public opinion favor state comes core perpetual privacy security battle post targeting privacy fbi director james come speaking bookings institution october going dark photo link bookings shining light fbi going dark last september the washington post published article entitled obama faces growing momentum support widespread encryption within contents perhaps true nature issue laid bare hat tip saperetic privately law enforcement officials acknowledged prospects congressional action year remote although legislative environment hostile today intelligence community top lawyer robert litt said colleagues august obtained the post could turn event terrorist attack criminal event strong encryption shown hindered law enforcement there value said keeping options open situation interesting october fbi director james come explained speaking bookings institution focused trying get law changed tech companies would comply law enforcement unlock data various outlined current security agenda concerning fbi we legal authority intercept access communications information pursuant court order often lack technical ability the bookings speech appeared stark contrast recent emotionally driven come wrote aware entitled we could not look survivors eye we did not follow lead here passage piece clearly displays conflicting message fbi director we simply want chance search warrant try guess terrorist postcode without phone essentially without taking decade guess correctly that we want break anyone encryption set master key loose land the guardian refers approach public senses one tone fbi comes across caring seems focused greater nationalistic implications good cop hovering interrogation room getting kind psychological drama prompted media think law enforcement agency exploiting public wake tragedy order increase security absolutely something make fbi claims going dark digital age it long since claimed intelligence agencies fear going dark age gadgets this idea vastly overflow rooted reality especially consider many revelations concerning nsa spying collection bulk metadata tracking programs isi catcher otherwise known stingray stingray acts cell tower locking onto devices certain area intercepts phone calls texts well notion law enforcement somehow condemned eternally outdated methods catch criminals future patently concept presentation fbi going dark scenario nothing talking point used increase police state apparatus within united panic february group experts published report regarding current status law enforcement ability keep demands crime solving world today the lengthy report entitled don panic compiled the german center internet society harvard university here passage examining fbi catchy mantra going dark the intelligence law enforcement communities view trend varying degrees alarm alleging interception capabilities going dark as describe companies increasingly adopting technological architectures inhibit government ability obtain access communications even circumstances satisfy fourth amendment warrant requirements encryption hallmark architectures government officials concerned without access communications fear may able prevent terrorist attacks investigate prosecute criminal activity their solution force companies maintain access user communications data provide access law enforcement demand pursuant applicable legal process however private sector resisted critics fear architectures geared guarantee access would compromise security privacy users around world also hurting economic viability companies they also dispute degree proposed solutions would truly prevent terrorists criminals communicating mediums resistant report states encryption difficult issue law enforcement sorts digital data encrypted therefore accessed via search warrant cause mention spying capabilities plethora smart devices also available fbi director former senior vice president locked martin discussing idea government going dark in article entitled here why fbi went after apple when it did fortune magazine revealed february doj head rosetta lynch requested extra million help fbi development workaround data encryption bringing total budget calls project going dark million will fbi continue develop encryption workaround event lose battle apple san bernardino case in summary regardless shape court battle apple fbi government wanting direct route personal devices moving apple important issue dip consumer confidence could crushing blow tech company overall important remember anomaly ridden events san bernardino shooting suspicious events garland texas last year addition inconvenient truths concerning government role manufacturing terror plots ironically prompted calls greater national security continuing appropriate large funds federal wonder fbi case apple fallen apart read more encryption news at century wire encryption
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: BATTLE OVER PRIVACY: Why the FBI’s Case Against Apple is Falling ApartShawn Helton 21st Century WireThis week a House Judiciary Committee began overseeing details of a US Federal Court case between tech company Apple and the FBI.On February 16th, Apple CEO Tim Cook publicly rejected a court order to decrypt an iPhone said to be connected to the San Bernardino mass-shooting case from December of 2015.The House Judiciary Committee listened to the controversial case between tech titan Apple and the FBI a day after Magistrate Judge James Orenstein of New York, struck down a federal court order pressuring Apple to help access encrypted data in a separate case involving illegal drug trafficking.The landmark decision made by Judge Orenstein stated that the All Writs Act of 1789 (also used as the FBI s main argument in the Apple/San Bernardino case) does not permit a court to order companies to pull encrypted data off a customer s phone or tablet,  according to a recent article from The Washington Post.The Post continued by discussing Orenstein s lengthy argument against the FBI s order against Apple in the drug related case: In a 50-page opinion disdainful of the government s arguments, Orenstein found that the All Writs Act does not apply in instances where Congress had the opportunity but failed to create an authority for the government to get the type of help it was seeking, such as having firms ensure they have a way to obtain data from encrypted phones. In addition, The Post outlined some of the social engineering aspects involved in the lead up to the FBI drug case overseen by Judge Orenstein, a case which has arguably been a part of an overarching back drop concerning the larger San Bernardino case: The Brooklyn case began last fall when Orenstein, one of a handful of magistrates across the country who are activists in the surveillance debate, received the government s application to issue an order to Apple. While Apple has previously helped the federal government with some 70 phone cases since 2008, Judge Orenstein examined several problems with the FBI s use of the All Writs Act: In an Oct. 9 ruling, Orenstein identified what he thought was a problem with the government s argument. Though prosecutors cited a 1985 decision that found that the All Writs Act is a source of authority to issue writs  not otherwise covered by statute,  he said they failed to cite another part of the decision that found that the act does not authorize the issuance of  ad hoc writs whenever compliance with statutory procedures appears inconvenient or less appropriate. The new ruling in the FBI drug case will likely have a heavy impact on the eventual ruling in the San Bernardino/Apple court order, as it directly questions the heart of the government s argument to gain easier access to encrypted consumer data.It s also interesting to note, that it was the FBI who put themselves in this position regarding the San Bernardino phone as they reportedly ordered the password to be reset via iCloud shortly after the apparent mass shooting.You have to wonder why the agency would have ordered a new password almost immediately following the highly dramatic scene in San Bernardino   INVENTIONS OF REALITY?    Is this latest  privacy crisis  a manufactured drama or a legitimate battle for those in the tech industry? (Photo illustration 21WIRE)What s interesting here, is that ABC news reported on December 3rd, a day after the apparent shooting,  Sources say mobile phones, hard drives, virtually anything with digital memory that was associated with the alleged shooters   Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik   was smashed. Adding to that, we ve mentioned a number of times here at 21WIRE, that none of the eyewitness testimony mentioned seeing a female shooter at the scene of the Inland Regional Center in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting.A Right to PrivacyIn our previous article detailing the ongoing encryption saga between Apple and the FBI, we stated that there are no guarantees in the security world, especially if a digital master-key were to be created, as this would potentially make it easier for invaders (either the government, or various hackers) mining for data moving forward into the future.In a recent Guardian article, some of those involved in the technology and security sector offered their thoughts regarding the government s continued encroachment on individual privacy:Dan Kaminsky, the security expert who made his name with the discovery that one of the most basic parts of the internet, the domain name system, was vulnerable to fraud   disagrees:  Feds want final authority on engineering decisions, and their interests don t even align with fighting the vast bulk of real-world crime. Kaminsky further explained why Apple s security measures already help law enforcement, If my iPhone is stolen, my emails stay unread, my photos stay unviewed, and I don t need to notify anyone that the secrets they entrusted me with are going to show up on the internet tomorrow. Continuing, The Guardian interviewed former FBI agent Michael German, currently at judicial think-tank the Brennan Center. The following is a portion of that interview: After 9/11, you had this concept of total information awareness. The intelligence community was very enamoured of the idea that all information was available. Much like the NSA, they wanted to see it all, collect it all, and analyse it all. Additionally, there are many who believe weaker encryption may pose an even bigger security risk globally.In many ways, it appears as though federal agencies are seemingly searching for the right crisis to push public opinion in favor of the state when it comes to security.This is at the core of the perpetual privacy and security battle post 9/11   TARGETING PRIVACY    FBI Director James Comey speaking at the Brookings Institution in October of 2014 about Going Dark. (Photo link brookings)Shining a Light on the FBI  Going Dark Last September, The Washington Post published an article entitled, Obama faces growing momentum to support widespread encryption,   and within its contents, perhaps the true nature of the security/privacy issue was laid bare (hat tip saperetic): Privately, law enforcement officials have acknowledged that prospects for congressional action this year are remote. Although  the legislative environment is very hostile today,  the intelligence community s top lawyer, Robert S. Litt, said to colleagues in an August e-mail, which was obtained by The Post,  it could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement. There is value, he said, in  keeping our options open for such a situation. Interestingly, in October of 2014, FBI Director James B. Comey, explained while speaking at the Brookings Institution he was  focused on trying to get the law changed  so that tech companies would have to comply with law enforcement to unlock data on various devices.Continuing, he outlined the current security agenda concerning the FBI,  We have the legal authority to intercept and access communications and information pursuant to a court order, but we often lack the technical ability to do that. The Brookings speech from 2014, appeared in stark contrast with a recent emotionally driven op-ed Comey wrote for Lawfare entitled  We Could Not Look the Survivors in the Eye if We Did Not Follow this Lead. Here s a passage from that piece, that clearly displays the conflicting message of the FBI director: We simply want the chance, with a search warrant, to try to guess the terrorist s passcode without the phone essentially self-destructing and without it taking a decade to guess correctly. That s it. We don t want to break anyone s encryption or set a master key loose on the land. The Guardian refers to this as a  two-pronged approach  on the public s senses   as one tone from the FBI comes across as caring and the other seems more focused on the greater, nationalistic implications of encryption.Think good cop/bad cop hovering over you in an interrogation room and you d be getting very warm.This is the kind of psychological drama that has prompted some in media to think that the law enforcement agency has been exploiting the public in the wake of tragedy, in order to increase security measures.This is absolutely something to watch.So, what are we to make of the FBI s claims of going dark in the digital age?It has long since been claimed that intelligence agencies fear going dark in the age of high-tech gadgetry. This idea is vastly overblown and not rooted in reality, especially when you consider the many revelations concerning NSA spying, collection of bulk metadata and other tracking programs such as the IMSI catcher, otherwise known as Stingray (Stingray acts as cell tower locking onto all devices in a certain area) intercepts phone calls, texts, as well as your location.The very notion that law enforcement will somehow be condemned eternally to outdated methods to catch criminals in the future   is patently absurd.Furthermore, the concept and presentation of the FBI s  going dark  scenario is nothing more than a talking point used to increase a police state apparatus within the United States.Don t PanicOn February 1st, a group of experts published report regarding the current status of law enforcement and their ability to keep up with the demands of crime solving in the world today. The lengthy report entitled  Don t Panic was compiled by The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Here s a passage below examining the FBI s catchy mantra,  Going Dark :The U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities view this trend with varying degrees of alarm, alleging that their interception capabilities are  going dark.  As they describe it, companies are increasingly adopting technological architectures that inhibit the government s ability to obtain access to communications, even in circumstances that satisfy the Fourth Amendment s warrant requirements. Encryption is the hallmark of these architectures. Government officials are concerned because, without access to communications, they fear they may not be able to prevent terrorist attacks and investigate and prosecute criminal activity. Their solution is to force companies to maintain access to user communications and data, and provide that access to law enforcement on demand, pursuant to the applicable legal process. However, the private sector has resisted. Critics fear that architectures geared to guarantee such access would compromise the security and privacy of users around the world, while also hurting the economic viability of U.S. companies. They also dispute the degree to which the proposed solutions would truly prevent terrorists and criminals from communicating in mediums resistant to surveillance.While the report states that encryption is a difficult issue for law enforcement, all sorts of digital data is unencrypted and therefore can be accessed via a search warrant if there is cause   not to mention the spying capabilities of a plethora of smart devices also available for review.Below is FBI Director (former Senior Vice President at Lockheed Martin) discussing the idea that the government is Going Dark In an article entitled  Here s Why the FBI Went After Apple When It Did,  Fortune magazine revealed that on February 9th, DOJ head Loretta Lynch requested  an extra $38 million to help the FBI development workarounds on data encryption, bringing the total budget of what it calls  project Going Dark  to $69 million. Will the FBI continue to develop  encryption workarounds  in the event that they lose their battle with Apple over the San Bernardino case?In Summary Regardless of how you shape the court battle between Apple and the FBI, this is about the government wanting a more direct route into personal devices moving ahead.For Apple, this is a very important issue as a dip in consumer confidence, could be a crushing blow to the tech company s overall brand.It s important to remember anomaly ridden events such as the San Bernardino shooting and the suspicious events in Garland, Texas, of last year, in addition to other inconvenient truths concerning the government s role in manufacturing its own terror plots   which have ironically prompted calls for greater national security, while continuing to appropriate large funds to federal agencies.You have to wonder, has the FBI s case against Apple fallen apart?READ MORE ENCRYPTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Encryption FilesMiddle-east
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: battle over privacy why fbi case against apple falling apartshawn hilton century wirethis week house judiciary committee began overseeing details us federal court case tech company apple february apple ceo tim cook publicly rejected court order crypt iphone said connected san bernardino case december house judiciary committee listened controversial case tech titan apple fbi day magistrate judge james wenstein new york struck federal court order pressing apple help access encrypted data separate case involving illegal drug landmark decision made judge wenstein stated all write act also used fbi main argument bernardino case permit court order companies pull encrypted data customer phone tablet according recent article the washington post continued discussing wenstein lengthy argument fbi order apple drug related case in opinion disdainful government arguments wenstein found all write act apply instances congress opportunity failed create authority government get type help seeking firms ensure way obtain data encrypted phones in addition the post outlined social engineering aspects involved lead fbi drug case overseen judge wenstein case arguably part overarching back drop concerning larger san bernardino case the brooklyn case began last fall wenstein one handful magistrates across country activists surveillance debate received government application issue order apple while apple previously helped federal government phone cases since judge wenstein examined several problems fbi use all write act in ruling wenstein identified thought problem government argument though prosecutors cited decision found all write act source authority issue write otherwise covered statute said failed cite another part decision found act authorize issuance ad hoc write whenever compliance statutory procedures appears inconvenient less appropriate the new ruling fbi drug case likely heavy impact eventual ruling san court order directly questions heart government argument gain easier access encrypted consumer also interesting note fbi put position regarding san bernardino phone reportedly ordered password reset via cloud shortly apparent mass wonder agency would ordered new password almost immediately following highly dramatic scene san bernardino inventions of reality is latest privacy crisis manufactured drama legitimate battle tech industry photo illustration what interesting abc news reported december day apparent shooting sources say mobile phones hard drives virtually anything digital memory associated alleged shooters seed maroon tashfeen malik smashed adding mentioned number times none eyewitness testimony mentioned seeing female shooter scene inland regional center aftermath san bernardino right privacy previous article detailing ongoing encryption saga apple fbi stated guarantees security world especially digital created would potentially make easier invaders either government various hackers mining data moving forward recent guardian article involved technology security sector offered thoughts regarding government continued encroachment individual privacy dan kaminsky security expert made name discovery one basic parts internet domain name system vulnerable fraud disagrees feds want final authority engineering decisions interests even align fighting vast bulk crime kaminsky explained apple security measures already help law enforcement if iphone stolen emails stay undead photos stay reviewed i need notify anyone secrets entrusted going show internet tomorrow continuing the guardian interviewed former fbi agent michael german currently judicial brennan center the following portion interview after concept total information awareness the intelligence community enamoured idea information available much like nsa wanted see collect analyse additionally many believe weaker encryption may pose even bigger security risk many ways appears though federal agencies seemingly searching right crisis push public opinion favor state comes core perpetual privacy security battle post targeting privacy fbi director james come speaking bookings institution october going dark photo link bookings shining light fbi going dark last september the washington post published article entitled obama faces growing momentum support widespread encryption within contents perhaps true nature issue laid bare hat tip saperetic privately law enforcement officials acknowledged prospects congressional action year remote although legislative environment hostile today intelligence community top lawyer robert litt said colleagues august obtained the post could turn event terrorist attack criminal event strong encryption shown hindered law enforcement there value said keeping options open situation interesting october fbi director james come explained speaking bookings institution focused trying get law changed tech companies would comply law enforcement unlock data various outlined current security agenda concerning fbi we legal authority intercept access communications information pursuant court order often lack technical ability the bookings speech appeared stark contrast recent emotionally driven come wrote aware entitled we could not look survivors eye we did not follow lead here passage piece clearly displays conflicting message fbi director we simply want chance search warrant try guess terrorist postcode without phone essentially without taking decade guess correctly that we want break anyone encryption set master key loose land the guardian refers approach public senses one tone fbi comes across caring seems focused greater nationalistic implications good cop hovering interrogation room getting kind psychological drama prompted media think law enforcement agency exploiting public wake tragedy order increase security absolutely something make fbi claims going dark digital age it long since claimed intelligence agencies fear going dark age gadgets this idea vastly overflow rooted reality especially consider many revelations concerning nsa spying collection bulk metadata tracking programs isi catcher otherwise known stingray stingray acts cell tower locking onto devices certain area intercepts phone calls texts well notion law enforcement somehow condemned eternally outdated methods catch criminals future patently concept presentation fbi going dark scenario nothing talking point used increase police state apparatus within united panic february group experts published report regarding current status law enforcement ability keep demands crime solving world today the lengthy report entitled don panic compiled the german center internet society harvard university here passage examining fbi catchy mantra going dark the intelligence law enforcement communities view trend varying degrees alarm alleging interception capabilities going dark as describe companies increasingly adopting technological architectures inhibit government ability obtain access communications even circumstances satisfy fourth amendment warrant requirements encryption hallmark architectures government officials concerned without access communications fear may able prevent terrorist attacks investigate prosecute criminal activity their solution force companies maintain access user communications data provide access law enforcement demand pursuant applicable legal process however private sector resisted critics fear architectures geared guarantee access would compromise security privacy users around world also hurting economic viability companies they also dispute degree proposed solutions would truly prevent terrorists criminals communicating mediums resistant report states encryption difficult issue law enforcement sorts digital data encrypted therefore accessed via search warrant cause mention spying capabilities plethora smart devices also available fbi director former senior vice president locked martin discussing idea government going dark in article entitled here why fbi went after apple when it did fortune magazine revealed february doj head rosetta lynch requested extra million help fbi development workaround data encryption bringing total budget calls project going dark million will fbi continue develop encryption workaround event lose battle apple san bernardino case in summary regardless shape court battle apple fbi government wanting direct route personal devices moving apple important issue dip consumer confidence could crushing blow tech company overall important remember anomaly ridden events san bernardino shooting suspicious events garland texas last year addition inconvenient truths concerning government role manufacturing terror plots ironically prompted calls greater national security continuing appropriate large funds federal wonder fbi case apple fallen apart read more encryption news at century wire encryption