“The Founders would be appalled,” Apple wrote in its last court filing before it squares off against the government in federal court in California at a hearing on March 22.[1]

Alina Selyukh, “the two-way” Breaking news from NPR

(By Daven Morrison, MD) Trying to solve a recent terrorist act (when Syed Rizwan Farook, who with his wife killed 14 people in the San Bernardino shooting on Dec. 2), investigators have been stumped by an inability to access the records of a captured cell phone of one of the terrorists. This was a problem in this case up until this week.

This case, although the technical problem has resolved, has surfaced several problems: the challenge of privacy; “back door” methods to bypass privacy; the needs of government to enforce the law and prevent crime; and the need for those who sell technology solutions to provide privacy protection for customers.

Apple and the FBI escalated the rhetoric as things got heated around core values of American Democracy: privacy and security. In an article outlining the final legal salvos before the case heads to court, Apple claimed a distortion of the law forcing a private entity to release would be a “Cancer” that would jeopardize privacy for everyone.  “The Founders would be appalled,” wrote the company (not realizing that George Washington was the first U.S. spymaster who ran extensive intelligence operations!).

In response, the FBI countered with claims of Apple overblowing the request and the threat. They see the request as targeted and modest.  And probably not unreasonable, given the fact that private entities (banks, car rental companies, etc.) have been relaying information for criminal investigations for years.  Both sides rallied advocates to their cause before the FBI found, through a third party, access to the phone’s files and records.

But what if they were both wrong? What if the question they were asking is wrong?

To a man with a hammer the whole world is a nail.

Mark Twain

What if we determined the passwords from the cell phone owners—using their personal psychological profiles – rather than creating a security disabling code?

The FBI request was simple: “Apple, break into this phone so we can see what leads follow from this known radicalized (and murderous) terrorist.” Apple’s reply: “’No way;’ it is a slippery slope and the creation of the software would allow all customers’ collective privacy to be at risk.”

From the perspective of our team, The Behavioral Forensics Group, we believe there is another way: study the person and unlock the phone through understanding him. Psychological profiles and “social engineering” have been continuously refined for centuries. Knowing the triggers (what is personally valued) for access is very valuable to fraudsters. But this knowledge has also been used for good.

The CIA has used long distance psychological profiling for over a half century to provide security from rogue states and despots. Frank Abagnale, the main character who creatively commits fraud in the movie “Catch Me,” was converted to an FBI resource because he understands the counterfeiter’s mind. Sam Antar, who committed virtually all major forms of financial fraud, informed us of the importance of psychology and the critical nature of the mind in countering fraud as we were writing the book.  He shared:

As a fraudster, I succeeded for almost two decades because I understood how to exploit the psychological and emotional weaknesses of my victims. This book teaches auditors and antifraud professionals about fraud psychology, the “soft underbelly of fraud” —the emotional manipulation, big and small lies, and other behavioral cues that fraudsters employ to successfully execute their crimes. I call it the art of spinning, and the authors have described it as the predator-prey dance.  Without such an understanding of the behavioral dynamics of fraud, victims will always be doomed to lose (lots of money) and fraudsters will always have the upper hand.

Sam Antar CFO Crazy Eddie

Could it be used in this case?

Likely it could, with an experienced and multidisciplinary team. It has been suggested in fiction. In Sherlock, the series about Sherlock Holmes and John Watson set in the modern era, the team desperately needs to get into a locked computer and have limited time to do so. As they scramble to determine what it might be, they create a rapid psychological profile based on detailed analysis of what is in the person’s office. In the end, after making a mental picture of a conservative, rule-following army official (working in Britain) and noting that biographies of Margaret Thatcher are found in multiple forms at eye level, they type in “Maggie” and the computer unlocks.  All of the factors Sherlock Holmes discovers tie back to relative core biographical values. These values have unique personal emotional weight. this unique to the person’s narrative, but the basic emotions tie back to the core BIOLOGICAL affects we explore in the ABCs of Behavioral Forensics

Why isn’t psychological profiling being used for password identification?

The Forensic Investigators on our team recognize challenges to the use of psychological profiling for intelligent estimates of potential access passwords:

• We would need access to information about the password creators and their primary interests and concerns—either directly or through acquaintances;
• Absent the above, we would need to psychologically profile the groups or organizations of which they are members;
• We would need to allow for cultural influences as we interpret whatever information is gained;
• And all of this during investigations where time is of critical importance.

Yet, this has been done in this manner using these data sources and more. Jerrold Post MD designed, recruited, implemented and effectively executed a multidiscipline team to find this information as he ran the psychological profiling division for over 30 years at the CIA. Perhaps the most insightful experience related to this problem was when we presented to the FBI. We discovered while they have used some forms of profiling for years, and maintain a forensics psychological unit, they are not targeting fraud! Most of the resources are assigned to other crime investigations and virtually none are directed toward the minds of white-collar criminals. The case of the terrorist’s locked phone  is one where a competent team with allocation of behavioral forensics resources might have avoided perceived threats to privacy.

Join us for more insights into behavioral forensics (behind fraud and similar white collar crimes) from the authors of A.B.C.s of Behavioral Forensics (Wiley, 2013): Sri Ramamoorti, Ph. D., Daven Morrison, M.D., and Joe Koletar, D.P.A., along with Vic Hartman, J.D. These distinguished experts come from the disciplines of psychology, medicine, accounting, law, and law enforcement to explain and prevent fraud. Because we are inspired to bring to light and address the fraud problems in today’s headlines, we encourage our readers to come back and revisit us regularly at BringingFreudtoFraud.com.