For your average criminal case, I don't believe companies can be compelled by investigators to "pwn" a user's service in this way. But there are two things to n

For your average criminal case, I don't believe companies can be compelled by investigators to "pwn" a user's service in this way. But there are two things to note: All of the US three-letter agencies have been lobbying VERY hard for warrantless surveillance of social networks and backdoors into E2EE apps, using CSAM as a justification and claiming that all of their existing evidence-gathering channels are "going dark" due to rising use of encryption. So far they haven't succeeded, but I feel that it is only a matter of time before they get the bulk of what they are asking for. Either due to a series of small "wins" stretched out over many years, or there will be a high-profile case where a child is abducted and murdered and the agencies will finally get their big win from congress by rushing in front of congress and TV cameras and shouting, "we could have prevented this with unfettered access to the criminal's phone!" (And I'll only give that about a 15% chance of actually being factually true.) Second, there is absolutely nothing preventing the government from secretly compelling any US person or company to produce evidence via practically any means for a case via a National Security Letter if they can even tangentially frame the suspect as a terrorist.