FBI locked 7.000 encrypted devices

Agents of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were not able to extract data from almost 7,000 mobile devices, have you tried to access, the Agency’s Director has said.

Christopher Wray said, the encryption on the devices was “a huge problem” for the FBI investigations.

The Agency had said error accessing the more than half of the devices that you are targeting in an 11-month period, he.

A cyber security expert said, this encryption was now a “fact of life”.

Many smartphones encrypt your content, when closed, as standard – a safety feature that prevents often access the phones ” manufacturers on the data.

Such encryption is another end-to-end encryption, which prevents the monitoring of communications on a large scale.

Cyber-security expert Professor Alan Woodward at the University of Surrey, said device encryption was clearly frustrating a criminal investigation, but it would be impractical and unsafe to develop “back doors” or weakened security.Trade-off

“Encryption, the frustrated forensic investigations authorities is a fact of life from now on, for the prosecution,” he said.

To build “even if the equipment manufacturer has a such encryption would it be possible to purchase the software, the encrypted data in the same way.”

Based on the trade-off between cyber-security and investigative hack, the FBI Director, said: “I get it, it is a balance must be established between the encryption and the importance of giving us the tools we need to help the public safety.”

Mr Wray was on the occasion of the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Philadelphia on Sunday.

In 2016, the FBI asked to unlock Apple iPhone used, by the San Bernardino-killer Syed Rizwan Farook.

Apple refused to explain that his phones had been designed in a way that even the manufacturer was able to access them as soon as encrypted.

The FBI later said a third company had found a way to break in Farook the device.

Earlier this month, a Federal judge ruled that the FBI, the identity of the company or how much was paid to the Agency for its services.

The ruling came in a freedom of information requests submitted by journalists.