Why isn’t the NSA helping the FBI unlock iPhones?

There’s also the possibility that the NSA can hack into the device but that it doesn’t want to tell that to the FBI because it never likes to reveal what it’s capable of doing.

This would go along with my theory that the FBI has laid a very clever public relations trap for Apple that will be very hard to escape.

The hackers at the National Security Agency have repeatedly shown themselves to be some of the most talented in the world and have hacked into the private data centers of both Google and Microsoft. Why, then, hasn’t the FBI turned to the NSA for help in unlocking the iPhone 5c used by San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook? 

No, a good deal maker will make great deals, but we’ll do it the way our founders thought it should be done. People get together, they make deals. Ronald Reagan did it with Tip O’Neil very successfully, you didn’t hear so much about executive orders, if you heard about it at all. You have to be able to get a consensus.

Martha, I will tell you, I have visited with active duty military, with veterans over and over and over again in town halls all over the state of New Hampshire. What we are doing to our sons and daughters, it is immoral. We are sending them into fight with their arms tied behind their back. They cannot defend themselves. And it is wrong.

And we can’t afford to do that because that will fundamentally change America.

going to have to forge consensus to bring about a set of common purposes so that we can move forward again in this country...

Oh, so — wait a second. Is that one of the skills you get as a United States senator ESP also? Because I don’t think it is.

Well, I think the experience is not just what you did, but how it worked out. Under Chris Christie’s governorship of New Jersey, they’ve been downgraded nine times in their credit rating.

The world is getting much more dangerous. We’ve had seven years with Barack Obama in the oval office, a commander-in-chief that is unwilling even to acknowledge the enemy we’re facing. This is a president who, in the wake of Paris, in the wake of San Bernardino, will not even use the words radical Islamic terrorism, much less focus on defeating the enemy.

when I came out, I hit immigration, I hit it very hard. Everybody said, “Oh, the temperament,” because I talked about illegal immigration.

I actually think I have the best temperament. I built a massive corporation.

“I don’t know anyone who would be comfortable with someone who behaves this way, having his finger on the button. We’re liable to wake up one morning, and if he were president, he would nuke Denmark.” Saying, quote, “That’s temperament of a leader to keep this country safe.”

Republican candidates will have the opportunity to face each other.

So, Rachel, yes, Secretary Clinton does represent the establishment. I represent, I hope, ordinary Americans, and by the way, who are not all that enamored with the establishment, but I am very proud to have people like Keith Ellison and Raul Grijalva in the House, the co-chairmen of the House Progressive Caucus.

They know what kind of a colleague I am. They want me as their partner in the White House. And that’s exactly what I will do.

I do believe that public colleges and universities should be tuition free.

So I do not accept the belief that the United States of America can’t do that.

I also believe in affordable college, but I don’t believe in free college, because every expert that I have talked to says, look, how will you ever control the costs.

got from 90 percent coverage to 100 percent coverage.

Yes, of course, we have special interests that are unfortunately doing too much to rig the game.

yet almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent. Not what America is supposed to be about. Not the fairness that we grew up believing that America was about.

Millions of Americans are giving up on the political process. And they’re giving up on the political process because they understand the economy is rigged.

And we do hope that the candidates will take this opportunity to show us the distinctions — show us the differences between them. That’s the whole reason that we’re here tonight.

Transcript of the Democratic Presidential Debate

Comey said that a decision favorable to the government in California would likely be cited in other investigations as a precedent where the feds or other law enforcement agencies want to get into Apple devices.

"In other words, law enforcement may not commandeer innocent third parties into becoming its undercover agents, its spies, or its hackers."

The American Civil Liberties Union is filing a "friend of the court" brief in California on Wednesday supporting Apple in its stand against the FBI, saying a ruling in favor of the government would have "catastrophic consequences."

FBI vs. Apple: ACLU Says Ruling for the Feds Would Be 'Catastrophic'

“They don’t want to acknowledge they have the capability at all,” said Chris Soghoian, principal technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It’s giving the NSA’s adversaries false confidence. If you’re Angela Merkel and you have an iPhone, you’re feeling pretty good right now.” Similarly, if Apple knew the NSA had found a vulnerability, it would presumably try to fix it.

“Apple is being quite creative with its argument. Assuming first that the NSA can get into the phone — then [asking it to help] is pushing the envelope into the classified world,” Thomson said.

The NSA, after all, has long targeted digital encryption systems for exploitation, and, as The Intercept revealed in 2015, the CIA and NSA have been working for nearly a decade specifically to find ways to hack into Apple devices. Those agencies could presumably help the FBI do what it wants to do to Farook’s iPhone: place a modified version of Apple’s iOS operating system on the device that allows rapid, unlimited attempts to guess Farook’s encryption passcode.

NSA Is Mysteriously Absent From FBI-Apple Fight

A Dangerous Precedent

We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country.

The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.

We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.

We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government’s efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.

Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.

This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.

The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand. 

A Message to Our Customers

Preventing another attack. "Recovery of information from the iPhone in question may not lead to anything new. But, what if there is evidence pointing to a third shooter? What if it leads to an unknown terrorist cell?"

Not just phones. "The target of the government's request in this case is Apple, but the government's theory would just as easily extend to any third-party developer that has as one of its functions collecting and storing personal information about the device's owner. The authority sought by the government would therefore extend not only to phones, laptop computers and tablets, but also to automobiles that store information regarding location and times of use; insulin pumps that store information about blood sugar levels; and the myriad other devices that collect and store personal information."

Dangerous precedent. "The government's demand here, at its core, is unbound by any legal limits. It would set a dangerous precedent, in which the government could sidestep established legal procedures authorized by thorough, nuanced statutes to obtain users' data in ways not contemplated by lawmakers."

The FBI argues this is an isolated incident involving a single iPhone 5C used by one of the terrorists involved with the December massacre in San Bernardino, California, and is necessary to keep Americans safe from future attacks.

A wide range of tech companies this week filed amicus briefs, or court filings that throw their support behind Apple in its legal tussle with the FBI.

Apparently, there's nothing that gets people talking like a debate between personal privacy and national security.

11 juiciest arguments made in the Apple vs. FBI iPhone fight

Roger Cheng is the executive editor in charge of breaking news for CNET News. Prior to this, he was on the telecommunications beat and wrote for Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal for nearly a decade. He's a devoted Trojan alum and Los Angeles Lakers fan.