Hmm, that seems untrue. Is this the first case where an agency had to get some assistance from a third party to execute a warrant? Like, getting access to a storage unit, or getting access to documents? In the case of a locked door, don&#x27;t you think it would be reasonable to require a landlord or such to unlock the door if they could? Especially if the walls were literally impenetrable.<p>I don&#x27;t know. It seems like that is the way the law works now. If it&#x27;s not what we want, maybe that should be the discussion. But this doesn&#x27;t seem fundamentally different than any other normal search order. Superficially different, sure. Instead of simply unlocking a door, it&#x27;s more like Apple has the blueprints for how to make a key and they&#x27;re being asked to do so. Apple is implying (but strangely, not explicitly saying) that they can&#x27;t do that without harming security for other people. I don&#x27;t believe it, or they should come out and say that.<p>And lastly, I think it&#x27;s splitting hairs to complain that they&#x27;re being asked to write special software rather than just hand over documents or unlock a door. To a lay person that may seem like an over burden, but for SMEs it should be pretty easy. If it isn&#x27;t easy, again, that should be what Apple says, but they haven&#x27;t. Because it&#x27;s <i>embarrassing</i> for them.<p>The position Apple <i>should be</i> in, is to say &quot;we <i>cannot</i> comply with this request&quot;. That would be great. But they can, pretty easily I would guess, so they&#x27;re beating around the bush instead.