Liberty Safes Gives Out Access Code

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Meh, if the warrant (or other court order) didn't specifically compell Liberty to assist in the search, then they did so voluntarily. Their company policy is crap.
I won't do any business with them in the future, based on this statement.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

No specific direction in the search warrant; no code. The founders wrote the 4th Amendment into the Bill of Rights for a specific reason, to keep the government semi-honest because they were aware of the corrupting influence of unlimited power. I have denied the Fire Department access to my Commercial Refrigeration shop in the past by asking them to give me a warrant signed by a judge stating specifically what they were looking for and why they believed they would find it. They backed off and told me the "inspection" was only for my safety. I told them that my safety was of much more importance to me and my family than to them. This was after I had been cited for insignificant items in past inspections and told I would be fined if I did not comply with their "suggestions." It was for things such as using a surge protecting strip on the end of a ten foot 14 gage extension cord to power a printer and copy machine that didn't pull 10 amps combined on their best days.

 

[Navy87Guy]

I seem to recall an incident where the FBI asked Apple to crack a phone for them and they said no, is this somehow different?

Yes. It’s different in that the authorities would have been able to access the safe without the codes - they would have just drilled it and ground the hinges off. Frankly, all Liberty did was save the owner from being left with a useless metal box.

With the iPhone, they could not access the data without cooperation from with the owner or Apple. It’s a very different scenario.

And according to Liberty, they were presented with a copy of a legal warrant - it wasn’t just a phone call.

 

[Hunter 08]

See below.

When a search warrant is executed, stuff that is locked up, needs to be done with a seperate warrant, one warrant unless otherwise stated in it, does not give free reign to search everything.

 

[Gordon]

I believe some safes have a serial number that is documented at the factory with the unlock code. If this is the case, it doesn’t matter if the safe is a mechanical dial.

Except it can be re set, All my safes, including the Liberty have been reset.

 

[mcb]

I own a 24 gun Liberty gun save with the digital lock. There is two side to this master combination capability that lets Liberty open a safe based on the serial number even without knowing the current combination. The bad side is they can let Law Enforcement into the safe against the owner's will, but assuming the police are functioning legally they can get in with or without the combination. If they have the search warrant they can get in destructively if need be. The good side is, assuming you have registered your safe with the company you have the ability to get into the safe even if you forget or otherwise lost the code that unlocks it. The can get you back into your safe based on the serial number.

 

[MarshallDodge]

If the Twitter uproar on this is any indication, Liberty is going out of business. Firearm owners rarely forgive, and never forget.

Liberty makes safes for a lot of companies, not just their own.

 

[Atavar]

But Liberty was not itself served with the warrant. They granted access when the plaintiff was served with the warrant. There is a difference.

 

[Double_J]

The case where Apple did not give out the keys to the phone is not the same as Liberty giving out a combination. Apple was INCAPABLE of giving out the keys as they did not have them, they were only stored on the phone and could not be recovered. The government stated they didn't care and that Apple had to comply even though they were unable to.

Liberty did what they were compelled to do as they have a "master key" code, and it saved the safe from being destroyed. We have not seen the warrant that was sent to Liberty and do not have actual knowledge of what was allowed to be searched.

My suggestion is to change the lockset out with one that does not have a master key. However this does not make the safe un-breachable as a locksmith can and will drill and cut it open if directed to by competent authority.

 

[Outlaw75]

Liberty did what they were compelled to do as they have a "master key" code, and it saved the safe from being destroyed. We have not seen the warrant that was sent to Liberty and do not have actual knowledge of what was allowed to be searched.

Except they weren't compelled. The warrant was for the safe owner, not Liberty. They can only be compelled to turn the code over if the Feds had a court order directing them to do so.

 

[JTHunter]

The only safe I have is NOT a "gun safe" but an older, refurbished one - with a dial. That company set the combination for it based on my requested numbers and I have not bothered to reset those since.

 

[sgt127]

If they had a signed warrant, Liberty had no choice. They would be charged with contempt of court. Probably hindering an investigation. They would have a deep IRS audit. Probably an SEC investigation and spend millions defending themselves in court.

If they didn’t have the passcode, a locksmith would have it open in less than 30 minutes. It’s just A Liberty safe. A good high end safe is rated as a TL-30. That specifies is can resist an attack by a professional for 30 minutes. Opening a Liberty is like popping the top on a can of Pringles.

More bothersome to me, do all the people that own Liberty safes know there’s a back door to open it?

With all the identity theft, one hook employee, that would bother me.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Except they weren't compelled. The warrant was for the safe owner, not Liberty. They can only be compelled to turn the code over if the Feds had a court order directing them to do so.

And the decision to save the safe and its contents from damage was not Liberty's call to make. If the safe owner wanted to give them the access codes he clearly could have done so. If the State wanted to resort to destructive means to open it, they clearly could have done so- they never ask Masterlock to cut them a front door key before kicking it in. I suspect a judge would be hesitant to issue an order for Liberty to surrender the codes for just this reason as it opens the door for civil rights lawsuits.
No, the FB1 wanted to save themselves the cost and hassle of drilling it out and Liberty voluntarily complied using their company policy as a lame shield.

 

[Hunter 08]

I'd be worried about some punk breaking into the house, claiming to be FBI with a faked warrant and getting the code from a company.

 

[General Geoff]

If they had a signed warrant, Liberty had no choice. They would be charged with contempt of court. Probably hindering an investigation.

A signed warrant against the safe owner, not Liberty. Liberty was under no legal compulsion to provide a backdoor access code to LE. For that, Liberty would need to be subpoenaed.



Which, Liberty has now backtracked and said they will require a subpoena from now on to provide any further access codes to LE, not just a search warrant. Guess they're feeling the heat.

 

[sgt127]

A signed warrant against the safe owner, not Liberty. Liberty was under no legal compulsion to provide a backdoor access code to LE. For that, Liberty would need to be subpoenaed.

That’s a valid point. The warrant gave them access to the safe. Not compel Liberty to provide the combination.

Liberty could have said no. But, there would be a steep price to pay. They wouldn’t like being told no.

And, they knew they needed a subpoena. But, correctly assumed Liberty would roll. As they did.

 

[benEzra]

More bothersome to me, do all the people that own Liberty safes know there’s a back door to open it?

With all the identity theft, one hook employee, that would bother me.

This was the big surprise to me as well; I thought a safe’s combination was known only to the owner and those with whom the owner has shared it. Naivety on my part, I guess.

 

[Charlie98]

If they didn’t have the passcode, a locksmith would have it open in less than 30 minutes.

I picked up a safe for my FIL some years ago, and while they were prepping it for pickup, the salesman allowed me to wander around the warehouse. It was full of breeched safes. I asked the salesman about it, and he told me anyone with an angle grinder or cutting torch can breech a safe in about 15-30 minutes if they know what they are doing.... and they don't go through the front door, they go through the sides. Please don't tell me the FBI (or the Government in general) doesn't have someone who knows how to pop a safe.

Assuming a proper warrant, and assuming they couldn't pop the safe at the premises, they could simply have taken it with them... as evidence. Sounds like they were just being lazy, and found a sympathetic ear at Liberty.

 

[old lady new shooter]

A local locksmith could have drilled the safe open in under 20 minutes, from time of arrival.

But it would have cost $300 or so.

Drill baby Drill!

But your point is taken. A Corporation is going to supply whatever information the Government requests, as long as the paperwork protects the Corporation from private lawsuits, and it does not affect sales.

If you have a change key, and can find the instructions on the web, a mechanical lock will have a unique combination that the OEM company can't give out.

And, electronic locks fail exponentially more than high quality mechanical locks. As locksmiths have told me, electronic locks are the gift that keeps on giving.

I have simplex locks. No electronics to fail, no keys to lose, self-defined combinations.

I guess drilling works on anything though.

 

[Jim Watson]

There are several accounts on P-F of government agents breaking into gun cases without the formality of getting the combination from the vendor.

 

[old lady new shooter]

A signed warrant against the safe owner, not Liberty. Liberty was under no legal compulsion to provide a backdoor access code to LE. For that, Liberty would need to be subpoenaed.



Which, Liberty has now backtracked and said they will require a subpoena from now on to provide any further access codes to LE, not just a search warrant. Guess they're feeling the heat.

View attachment 1170284

Props to them for figuring out what they could have done better and stating their new policy.

 

[RickD427]

When a search warrant is executed, stuff that is locked up, needs to be done with a seperate warrant, one warrant unless otherwise stated in it, does not give free reign to search everything.

There is nothing special about "stuff that is locked up" when it comes to the execution of search warrants. The officers serving the warrant may search the places listed in the warrant, for the items listed in the warrant. If I'm searching a listed residence for a blue revolver and I find a gun safe in the residence, that safe may be searched without need of any additional warrant.

There was a brief period where warrants served in the Ninth Circuit for electronic records needed special treatment, but that case (U.S. v Comprehensive Drug Testing) was quickly overturned in an en banc rehearing.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Apple spent gazillions on lawyers arguing that giving .Gov access would compromise trade secrets. I don't think Liberty could go that route. They could still contest, but it would be expensive. The optics of at least appearing to support their customers' rights might be worth it, however.

Liberty may have juicy Govt. contracts they don't want to jeapordize as well, of course.

At stake with Apple was propriatary security information. The feds weren't asking Apple to access a phone...they were asking Apple to tell them HOW to access the phone by providing them with all the information they needed to literally circumvent any iPhone security on the market, which would have immediately obviated the security for every iPhone out there at the time.

Liberty doesn't operate anything like that. All Liberty SHOULD have said was "come back with a warrant for us" or words to that effect. That's not a big-bucks legal thing.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

This is exactly right, right here. Going off of pure speculation (as we ALL are), do you REALLY think the combination would have stopped the government? Liberty saved the destruction of the man's safe, that's it. I understand the idea of the 4th Amendment, but the government had a warrant. Who's to say that the government didn't send a photo of the warrant to Liberty? Without the full story, it's all speculation, but it seems to me a lot of people are looking for a reason to hate a company that saved the demolition of a man's safe, and that's it. The government was getting into that safe with, or without, the help of Liberty.

I don't think anybody's against a PROPER warrant. The supposition is that they did not. And if that's true, then they were in the wrong.

As for "Liberty saved the destruction of the man's safe", that's not their responsibility. If the owner of the safe was that concerned, then HE would have provided that information. Obviously he wasn't concerned about the destruction of the safe, he was concerned with the security of its contents, so I doubt he's all fired up to thank Liberty over saving his safe for him.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

I think Liberty is done. They're on the naughty list.

Apple was different. As I understood that issue, Apple had no tool to crack a phone. They could make one, but if they did then any law enforcement agency in the would could compel them to hand the tool over. And the law couldn't be used to get them to spend the man hours to develop the tool. If it existed it would need to be handed over, but it didn't so pound sand.

Liberty, from what I can tell, has a way to generate a code that will unlock your safe regardless of your current passcode. All they need is your serial number and someone asking who's law enforcement. Twitter posts are suggesting that Liberty was sold in the last few years and the new owners are big campaign donors to swing state elections too.

Regardless, Liberty made their bed.