FBI won’t be Compelled to Disclose San Bernardino iPhone Hacking Tool

According to ZDNet, one federal court yesterday ordered that FBI doesn't need to reveal either the vendor name used or price government paid for hacking in iPhone 5C of Syed Farook, the mass shooter. The device has embroiled in heated national controversy and legal stand-off during last year, when the Apple has refused to support and help FBI to develop one backdoor in it to obtain sensitive information of Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, Wife of Farook, both of them participated in terrorist attack which caused the death of 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in Dec. 2015.

According to ZDNet, a technology website, few principal media houses has filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit for revealing name of hacking tool's vendor as well as its price. The court finally ruled on Sunday by saying that FBI would not be compelled to disclose details of a hacking tool which was used to break iPhone of a terrorist.

Federal Judge Tanya Chutkan said in her ruling that if the name of the vendor is disclosed, its cost would put a target on its back and it could cause loss of theft of hacking tool. Ultimately, FBI purchased forensic software in the open market which made it possible to access the contents of the iPhone 5C without any help from Apple. Bgr.com posted on October 2nd, 2017, stating "While there are tentative reports about the money paid by FBI for specialized iPhone hack, not to mention speculation about the company which provided the workaround, solid answers have never been given.

The court rules that the FBI may decide to increase the capabilities of the hacking tool and redeploy it in other scenarios in future. The ruling also says that if the identity of the person who provided the tool is disclosed then this might hinder the efforts of FBI in this matter.

This was successful step for it, however it refused all opportunities to disclose the identity of the helper, or how much they paid for this assistance. The conclusion of the FBI that by disclosing the vendor name to common public may put the vendor's systems, and thus vital information regarding the technology, in risk of incursion is very reasonable.

» SPAMfighter News - 10/6/2017