> The only risk is compromise of the signing key, and that's the same as any iOS update. I disagree. If the DOJ gets a signed copy of the software, that's a v

> The only risk is compromise of the signing key, and that's the same as any iOS update. I disagree. If the DOJ gets a signed copy of the software, that's a very different level of risk. There are all kinds of issues with software development we often underestimate. The issues aren't always technical matters. Sometimes they are human. This court case isn't just about software development. It's also about what the DOJ can demand, and how that impacts software development. The DOJ could very well demand that Apple hand over a signed version of the customized OS. After that, how can Apple be expected to secure their product? They can't. The last relevant case using AWA was USA vs. New York Telephone. Have you read OK's review of that case as it pertains to a potential USA vs. Apple? [1] This is from the judges' concluding remarks, which help define the AWA as it will be used today and in the future: "We agree that the power of federal courts to impose duties upon third parties is not without limits; unreasonable burdens may not be imposed" "The order provided that the Company be fully reimbursed at prevailing rates, and compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the Company and no disruption to its operations." n.b. compliance with it required minimal effort on the part of the Company Consider the burden Tim Cook and Apply will bear when he compels his software engineers to remove password-entry safeguards and release the signing key that they have guarded so carefully. Employee morale will tank. > Do you have any other justification for your belief other than trusting Tim Cook? I trust Tim and stand behind him when he says it's time to stand up to the DOJ. These cases have been heard behind closed doors for years, decades, have hurt business such as Yahoo, Skype etc. and have never been shown the spotlight that this case has. Everyone knows what an iPhone is, from the US to Cambodia, and they will all be following this case closely. It's time to share what we know as techies about the inner workings of the devices in people's pockets and the unchecked surveillance systems of our government. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/02/19/preliminary-thoughts-on-the-apple-iphone-order-in-the-san-bernardino-case-part-2-the-all-writs-act/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...