FTA: (a cop could) ask them to devise a way to retrieve the requested data from that device. Like, say, pushing a signed update to the target handset that will

FTA: (a cop could) ask them to devise a way to retrieve the requested data from that device. Like, say, pushing a signed update to the target handset that will be tied to that device’s UDID (Unique Device Identifier). That way there’s no chance the coppers can intercept that update and re-use it on whomever they want I'm amazed at the naiveness of this approach. Sure, it looks good on paper: "Cops can't use wiretap for user X against user Y". But using technical means to prevent illegal behavior by police seems to be entirely the wrong approach. How about instead not giving the police the means to break the law? Or, why stop with device-specific checks? Why not just force the APP to do a UDID lookup to a police-controlled server, where it can control who gets wiretapped? If the companies don't comply, throw the executive in jail for "contempt of court"! After all, we're out to get the bad guys! Apple and others are right to fight this nonsense. They should take every possible step to ensure that they themselves can't help the police side-step the law. It not only protects their users, it protects themselves, too.