The right answer here is they need a valid writ from a court, just like the FBI had. We don't have much of an issue with criminals getting wiretaps through fak

The right answer here is they need a valid writ from a court, just like the FBI had. We don't have much of an issue with criminals getting wiretaps through faking subpoenas to phone companies (although I did find https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/feds-brooklyn-prosecutor-forged-judges-signatures-to-wiretap-lover/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/feds-brooklyn-pr... when searching.) Note that I'm not arguing that Apple should have complied, that the court should have said a particular thing, or anything like that (did enough arguing last year when the case was going on). All I'm saying is the comparison is invalid, and the author doesn't know the technical details and is therefore wrong.