This February18,2016, CRS report entitled Encryption and Evolving Technology: Implications for U.S. Law Enforcement Investigations tries to help Congress better understand the challenges that encryption poses for law enforcement investigtions. 

This isn’t an easily solved dilemma.  For years the U.S. law enforcement and security community has been encouraging private industry to better safeguard proprietary and personnel information.  Well, the feds got their wish.  Apple took the message to heart and invented the better safeguard.

It would be very easy to side with Apple and simply declare that a company developing a unique and effective security product has no obligation to anyone to at the same time develop a way to defeat that product.

However, we think that even Apple might want to consider the possibility that another country’s government may have already found a way to do what Apple says can’t be done with the iPhone 5c.   Will Apple expect the FBI to investigate if that happens?

Suppose somebody kidnaps Apple CEO Tim Cook and during the ensuing investigation, the FBI learns  the suspect used an encrypted Apple device.  Now suppose that somehow the encrypted Apple device falls into the FBI’s hands, and recovering Cook alive may hinge on what’s encrypted in the device.  In that case, would Apple decide that its corporate principle is more important than its corporate principal?