Apple is currently battling the FBI, who wants to force Apple to create a version of iOS that enables it to unlock a domestic terrorist's iPhone.
But this isn't the only case Apple is fighting regarding the unlocking of iPhones. The DEA went to court to force Apple to unlock an iPhone involved in a drug case, and just lost. Again, the All Writs Act was invoked, and Judge James Orenstein's ruling makes for interesting reading. He concludes that an Act written in 1789 could not possibly have foreseen the ramifications of today's technology, and that a debate is required to decide how best to balance competing interests of privacy and government interests. This ruling isn't going to help the FBI's case.
Also, the House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee hearing on encryption is today. The opening statements can be read here. Professor Susan Landau's statement explains the risks of forcing Apple to unlock its phones by creating a hacked version of iOS. Again, as we've discussed, the primary risk is that this software may fall into the wrong hands. Once created, it will never disappear. She suggests the FBI pursue other avenues.
New York County District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr's statement confuses Apple's ability to remotely access iPhones to update the software or wipe the contents with the ability to read the the phone's data . He resorts to rhetoric: "Apple have effectively decided that they know better than our elected representatives and professionals in law enforcement how best to keep Americans safe". He states "I urge Congress to enact a national solution".