Cell Phone Engineer Reviews Smartphone Encryption Claim

ByJohn Lomicky

Updated on

This case involves a smartphone company’s announcement that its new device came equipped with hard disc encryption enabled by default. It was further announced that phone users would not keep the key to decrypt these devices. It was alleged that consumers could not even unlock a locked phone of these types. An expert in encryption was sought to determine if the assertion had any merit and whether information could be obtained from devices without the user inputting the password to unlock the phone. The expert was also asked to discuss the relative increase in consumer privacy and security resulting from this.

Question(s) For Expert Witness

1. Are you familiar claims that new smartphones have encryption enabled by default that they will be unable to decrypt?

2. Do you have an encryption background in this space as applied to manufacturing and engineering?

3. Can you discuss the relative impact on security and privacy if this is true?

Expert Witness Response E-009721

inline imageI'm an engineer with 30 years in developing the cell phone system worldwide. I hold 29 patents and 4 trade secrets with a prominent service provider. Part of the work we developed involved encryption schemes used to encrypt phone calls. Our work also involved the information that goes back and forth across the air when you make a phone call. We spent a lot of time developing this because people would clone phones by capturing the unencrypted information out of the air. This is fairly straight forward, and this type of encryption has been around forever. What's happening here is not new and is easy to understand. Using a double key method, smartphone companies can claim that they have very good security and that they cannot open a user's phone because they do not have the ability to get the security code. That is true. Only the user has the combination to the lock. There are other methods too (public/private keys). There are simple examples of this I could convey that a jury could understand.

About the author

John Lomicky

John Lomicky

John Lomicky is a J.D. candidate at FSU Law with a multidisciplinary background. He earned his Bachelor's degree in Neurobiology and Near Eastern Studies from Georgetown University and has graduate degrees in International Business and Eurasian Studies. His extensive professional experience includes significant contributions in legal business development and research.

At Expert Institute, John held several key roles over five years, including Director of Business Development, where he oversaw an inside sales team, generating six-figure monthly revenue and fostering relationships with a diverse range of legal practices, including top-tier firms and solo practitioners. As Associate Director of Research, he led the company's first physical expansion, establishing a successful operation in California and managing a team of over 20 research and sales professionals. In his role as Associate in Research, he provided tailored consulting services to attorney clients across North America, connecting them with the right experts for cases in various fields, including personal injury and intellectual property,

John's expertise spans managing sales teams and driving company expansion, developing consultative services tailored to legal practices, and cultivating strong relationships within the legal community.

He is currently pursuing a JD/LLM in Tax at the University of Florida - Fredric G. Levin College of Law, where he is involved with the Florida Tax Moot Court Team and the Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic.

Find an expert witness near you

What State is your case in?

What party are you representing?

background image

Subscribe to our newsletter

Join our newsletter to stay up to date on legal news, insights and product updates from Expert Institute.