美國(guó)聯(lián)邦調(diào)查局（FBI）已經(jīng)通過一個(gè)身份不明的第三方機(jī)構(gòu),，成功獲取了圣伯納蒂諾襲擊者iPhone手機(jī)上的數(shù)據(jù)。對(duì)于蘋果公司來(lái)說(shuō)，要弄清楚他們是怎么做到的,，或許還是有希望的,。

而在美國(guó)另一端的紐約，蘋果公司仍在就是否應(yīng)幫助司法部獲取一個(gè)販毒嫌犯iPhone手機(jī)上的數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行著一場(chǎng)法律戰(zhàn),。盡管蘋果公司曾希望不予理睬,，以免被法院要求幫助司法部獲取數(shù)據(jù)——FBI稱這些數(shù)據(jù)可用來(lái)找到一個(gè)可疑的販毒鏈條上的其他參與者——但現(xiàn)在這可能變成了蘋果唯一的一次機(jī)會(huì)，好查明政府如何“黑”入圣伯納蒂諾襲擊者塞義德?法魯克所使用的iPhone,。

在接下來(lái)的兩周,，美國(guó)司法部要確定是否繼續(xù)公開同蘋果的案件。路透社援引了解這項(xiàng)策略的知情人士的話說(shuō),，若政府決定公開案件,，那么蘋果可能會(huì)請(qǐng)求法院令司法部披露如何解鎖了圣伯納蒂諾襲擊者的iPhone。

這種辦法困難重重,。路透社的消息人士稱,，首先，司法部需要確定公開其與蘋果的案件,。第二,，蘋果公司要進(jìn)入一場(chǎng)漫長(zhǎng)的法庭之爭(zhēng)并利用證據(jù)開示制度——這是雙方通過交換信息可以對(duì)案件更多了解的一個(gè)階段——迫使司法部披露如何入侵到法魯克的iPhone。

該請(qǐng)求是合情合理的,。畢竟,，如果這種方法在法魯克的iPhone 5c上奏效，那么,，蘋果公司可以質(zhì)疑為什么在紐約毒品案的iPhone（運(yùn)行的是iOS 7—操作系統(tǒng)的一個(gè)舊版本,，保護(hù)性能不如新的iOS版本）上不奏效。

問題依然是,，蘋果公司能否真的有這種機(jī)會(huì)查明司法部是如何獲取法魯克的iPhone數(shù)據(jù)的,。在一個(gè)不明身份的第三方聯(lián)系到FBI稱可以以一種技術(shù)獲取法魯克數(shù)據(jù)之后，政府在上周提交的法庭文件中表示希望推遲與蘋果在加利福尼亞的案件,。之后司法部很快破解了該iPhone,，司法部撤銷了同蘋果的案件，也沒說(shuō)明是如何獲取的數(shù)據(jù),。

與此同時(shí),，蘋果之前表示，若司法部在沒有蘋果的幫助下而獲取了數(shù)據(jù),，那么公司要知道用的什么方法,。蘋果可能會(huì)修補(bǔ)漏洞這樣的舉動(dòng)無(wú)疑會(huì)令執(zhí)法官員不滿，這可能也就是司法部為何決定不披露如何破解iPhone的原因,。

這些天來(lái),，無(wú)任何跡象表明FBI要向蘋果透露如何破解的手機(jī),。蘋果別無(wú)選擇只能希望司法部在紐約毒品案件中仍需要蘋果的幫助，然后走法律程序,。

這真是世事無(wú)常,。

就在上周，蘋果公司曾希望擺脫紐約案件,?？偛课挥诩又萸痃甑僦Z的蘋果致函地方法院法官馬戈?布羅迪，要求推遲案件直到FBI確定能否破解法魯克的iPhone 5c,。蘋果在信件中表示,，若FBI成功破解，那么紐約案件就不合理,，因?yàn)槭褂猛瑯拥姆椒▽?duì)付紐約的iPhone應(yīng)該也奏效,。

蘋果可能說(shuō)的太快了。假定同樣的方法在其他iPhone上奏效,，那么司法部幾乎無(wú)疑會(huì)擺脫蘋果——就像在圣伯納蒂諾案中那樣,。然后，司法部就一直保守著自己的“破解之謎”,。

在接下來(lái)的幾周內(nèi),，我們將確切知道司法部的下個(gè)舉動(dòng)是什么。但是,，如果路透社的消息人士沒說(shuō)錯(cuò),，那么，蘋果可能希望在紐約打一場(chǎng)持久戰(zhàn),，從而可以最終查明iPhone是如何被破解的,。

司法部和蘋果都未對(duì)要求其評(píng)論的請(qǐng)求立即作出回應(yīng)。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Pessy

審校：詹妮

Apple’s hopes of finding out how the FBI and an unidentified third party accessed data on the San Bernardino attacker’s iPhone are not dashedyet.

On the other side of the country, Appleis still waging a legal battle in New York over whether it should help the Justice Department obtain data on an iPhone owned by an alleged drug dealer. While Apple had hoped to ditch the case and therefore not be asked by the court to help the Justice Department access the data, which the FBI says could be used to find other participants in a possible drug ring, it now might be one of Apple’s only chances of finding out how the government hacked the iPhone used by San Bernardino attacker Syed Farook.

Within the next two weeks, the Justice Department needs to determine whether or not to keep open its case with Apple. If the government decides to keep the case open, Apple could petition the court to force the Justice Department to reveal how it unlocked the San Bernardino iPhone, Reuters isreporting, citing a source with knowledge of the strategy.

The technique would be difficult, at best. First, the Justice Department would need to decide to keep its case with Apple open. Second, Apple would need to enter into a lengthy court battle and use discovery—a phase during which both sides can learn more about the case by exchanging information—to compel the Justice Department to reveal how it cracked Farook’s iPhone, the Reuters source says.

The request would be legitimate. After all, if the method worked on Farook’s iPhone 5c, Apple could question why it wouldn’t work on the iPhone in the New York case, which is running iOS 7—an older version of the operating system that didn’t have the same protections as newer iOS versions.

Questions remain over whether Apple will actually get the chance to find out how the Justice Department accessed data on the Farook’s iPhone. The government said in a court filing last week that it wanted to postpone its case with Apple in California after an unidentified third-party had approached the FBI with a technique that could access Farook’s data. Soon after the Justice Department cracked the iPhone, it nixed its case with Apple and has not said how it gained access.

Apple, meanwhile, has said previously that if the Justice Department accessed the data without its help, it would ask for the method. The tech giant would likely respond by patching the hole. Such a move would undoubtedly anger law enforcement officials, which is potentially why the Justice Department decided against revealing how it cracked the iPhone.

As the days continue on, there are no signs of the FBI revealing to Apple how it cracked the handset. Apple could have no other choice but to hope that the Justice Department still needs its help in the New York drug case and go through the legal paces there.

How quickly things can change.

Just last week, Apple had hoped to get out of the New York case. The Cupertino, Calif.-headquartered company issued a letter to District Court Judge Margo Brodie asking for a delay in the case until the FBI could determine if it could hack Farook’s iPhone 5c. Apple argued in that letter at the time that if the FBI was successful, the New York case would no longer be legitimate because the same method should work with iPhone there.

Apple might have spoken too quickly. Assuming the same method works with other iPhones, the Justice Department will almost undoubtedly give Apple its wish and let it off the hook—just as it did in San Bernardino. And along the way, it’ll keep its secret to itself.

We’ll know for sure what the Justice Department’s next move is in the next couple of weeks. But if theReuters sources are correct, Apple could be hoping for a protracted court battle in New York so it can finally find out how its iPhone was cracked.

Neither the Justice Department nor Apple immediately responded to a request for comment.