In an effort to fight human trafficking, Assemblyman Jim Cooper introduced legislation that would require any smartphone manufactured on or after January 1, 2017, and sold in California after that date” to be “capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its manufacturer or its operating system provider.
Any smartphone that couldn’t be decrypted on demand would subject a seller to a $2,500 fine.
If the AB 1681 becomes law, there would be a ban on nearly all iPhones and many devices that run Google’s Android software in California. The bill also mimics legislation ofthe New York Senate who last week introduced almost the same word-for-word legislation.
Here are statements made by Apples Tim Cook on Encryption.
Back in September of 2014 APPLE stated it had expanded its data encryption so it could not bypass one’s password and hand over the data to police.
“On devices running iOS 8, your personal data such as photos, messages (including attachments), email, contacts, call history, iTunes content, notes, and reminders is placed under the protection of your passcode,” the company wrote on its website Wednesday evening. “Unlike our competitors, Apple cannot bypass your passcode and therefore cannot access this data. So it’s not technically feasible for us to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession running iOS 8.”
Here is the press release put out by Assemblyman Jim Cooper:
Cooper Introduces Human Trafficking Evidentiary Access Legislation
SACRAMENTO – At a press conference earlier this week, Assemblymember Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove), along with the Sacramento County District Attorney’s office, crime victim’s families, and bill supporters, announced the introduction of AB 1681. The bill will allow law enforcement to investigate and prosecute suspected criminals and criminal organizations that are involved in human trafficking and other serious crimes.
In 2014, cell phone manufactures began providing new operating systems for smartphones and tablets, these new operating systems employ, by default, “full-disk encryption” (FDE).
The only way to access data stored on a smartphone using an FDE operating system is by the user, or with permission from the user, using a passcode. This includes when law enforcement establishes probable cause, secures a judicial search warrant from a judge, and serves that search warrant on the operating systems manufacturer, seller, or leaser.
“Human traffickers are using encrypted cell phones to run and conceal their criminal activities,” said Assemblymember Cooper. “Full-disk encrypted operating systems provide criminals an invaluable tool to prey on women, children, and threaten our freedoms while making the legal process of judicial court orders, useless,” Cooper added.
Without AB 1681, law enforcement risks losing crucial evidence in human trafficking cases if the contents of passcode-protected smartphones remain immune to a court order.
“I support an anti-encryption policy that will restore the ability to access cellphone data by a court ordered search warrant. If smartphones are beyond the reach of law enforcement, crimes will go unsolved, criminals will not be held accountable, victims will not receive justice and our ability to protect our children and community will be significantly compromised,” said Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert.
AB 1681 will impose a civil penalty upon any manufacturer, seller, or leaser of specified operating systems for smartphones that use a “default” system that block the manufacturer, seller, or leaser from complying with a search warrant issued by a judge.
AB 1681 would restore a critical investigative tool, while keeping our communities safe and preserving the Fourth Amendment.
Assemblymember Cooper represents the Cities of Sacramento, Elk Grove, Galt, and Lodi.
8 comments
The slippery slope to total surveillance.
So then, they want to just ban all new iPhones, Android devices, etc. because they can’t access them at will? Hahaha, I think the vast majority of us with these devices are NOT human traffickers, and feel a bill like this is more a threat to our 4th amendment rights than a necessity for law enforcement to convict criminals! Didn’t Governor Brown just sign a bill limiting the search of private digital information such as phones by police?
It goes both ways- if law enforcement wants to search our phones at will, perhaps they should quit hiding their own communications from the people by encrypting their radios! That would show some sort of good faith. They need a search warrant either way, and I think this type of legislation is using a very serious issue of human trafficking to justify a broad change in consumer electronics, mostly to make it easier to investigate us all. How many human trafficking cases have been lost or dropped by prosecutors due to a lack of evidence from an encrypted phone? I doubt many!
Curtis, it’s refreshing to see some common sense being used on this site. Apparently some of our neighbors will also roll over and play dead if the cops so wish. If Jennifer’s logic was to be used, the police should also disengage their radio encryption since they also “have nothing to hide.” It’s the Jennifers of this country that are further pushing us into the American police state…
He wants to fight human trafficking, and people are complaining? If you have nothing to hide, what difference does it make? Are you worried someone might get a hold of your important conversation… they’re out of milk… should I get any bread? Get real.
If you’re that concerned, don’t make any calls. Have the conversation in person. Like the good old days.
Jennifer, please justify the obvious hypocrisy of having our phone security encryption taken down while in the flip side having the police radios now encrypted? The police are public servants just like ANY other branch in society today. Why should we tolerate setting them apart as a class of their own with rights above be People’s? After all, aren’t they here to protect and serve Us? Whatever happened to the voice of the People in all this?
Common sense says if you don’t have anything to hide… you don’t have anything to hide. I couldn’t care less if you listened to my calls or read my emails. If you’re the criminal element… you have an argument. I’m not the criminal element, nor am I a convicted felon.
I’m pro law enforcement… period. It’s the lowlifes who are worried. Not me. Enjoy your criminal record as well as your shady lifestyle.
Human trafficking is a serious problem in CA, and if you don’t understand you have a criminal mentality. Or you’re a POS. Or both.
Jennifer, you are by far the most un-American commentator on this site so far. You don’t care if the federal government listens in on your calls and reads your mail? This is an obvious sign that the current police state has brainwashed you thoroughly. Privacy is an INHERENT human right; the Constitution was written in order to protect that right. Why not just willingly accept video surveillance of all your actions as well, since you have nothing to hide? If we keep traveling down this slippery slope, the Feds will in essence embody the omnipresent/omniscient position that they seek.
It has nothing to do with you being the perfect, law-abiding citizen that you believe you are; it has everything to do with protecting the basic freedoms we are all born with! The Constitution doesn’t grant rights, it’s meant to PROTECT natural rights. Privacy is one of them. Apparently you favor safety/security over freedom. There are better ways of fighting human trafficking; giving up fundamental rights is not one of the. Turn off the tube and think for yourself for once.
First of all, there are more than one Jennifer here. This is the third (and probably last) time I’ll mention this. But all the Jennifer comments (on this thread) are mine. I’m not the same Jennifer that whines about wine or thugs, just to name a couple examples. I’ve defended that on a winery thread, and a hefty heister bank robbery thread.
That being said, no, I don’t care if someone reads me emails or listens in on my calls. My emails and phone calls aren’t PRIVATE. I like my PRIVACY, and have enough common sense NOT TO DISCUSS ANYTHING PRIVATE on a cell phone or by email. My private conversations are in person. There is no such thing as privacy on the internet or on a cell phone. If you were well educated, you would understand this. Every email and cell phone call is anything but private. You don’t know this?
I was a court reporter for 27 years (Superior Court) in San Diego. My husband is a lawyer. I understand the law, the constitution, freedom, etc.
Let me be blunt. I DON’T GIVE A **** IF THEY LISTEN IN. I have nothing to hide. I am thinking for myself, and still don’t care. Ever heard of not caring? I DON’T GIVE A **** ABOUT POLICE RADIOS. I don’t listen to scanners. It’s not on my radar screen. If it’s a concern to you… fine. I’m not YOU!
I’m entitled to my opinion, and if you don’t like it, perhaps it’s best that you don’t read my posts. Ever heard of agreeing to disagree?
You’re not my mother, and you’re not going to tell me how to think. I’m pro law enforcement. PERIOD!
Have a nice evening, and have enough common sense to let others have their opinion, even if it differs from yours. Why would you even care what others think?
Comments are closed.