Last month, both Apple and Google announced that all future operation systems for their respective devices will feature data encryption. This means that a user’s data can only be unlocked with a passcode and neither Apple, Google, nor any third party can access the information on the device itself.

Apple has already implemented encryption in its most recent release, iOS 8, while Google’s next update is expected sometime this fall.

Additionally, Apple stated that the new encryption means that “it’s not technically feasible for (the company) to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession” so long as the device is running iOS 8 or any future operating systems.

In a recent appearance on 60 Minutes, FBI Director James Comey criticized Apple’s new privacy policy. Comey expressed concern that devices with the new operating systems would allow someone to place themselves beyond the law, likening encrypted phone data to selling cars with trunks that cannot be opened by police, even with a warrant.

However, Apple is not absolved of all duties to comply with federal investigations. The company is still legally obligated to turn over user data not stored directly on the iPad and iPhone, such as information stored on its iCloud service, including photos, videos, music, e-mails, contacts, and other data.

Overall, such encryption expands the privacy the Supreme Court afforded citizens in Riley v. California, in which the Court ruled that law enforcement should be required to obtain a warrant to search the phone of an arrested person under the Fourth Amendment.

  Not only are police required to obtain a warrant to search someone’s phone because of the Riley decision, they may now be unable to even retrieve any private information during a search if the user employs a passcode.

Still, the impact of the new operating systems on investigations may not be as drastic as it appears. Old-fashioned methods of passcode cracking, including the use of common passcodes such as 1-2-3-4 or loved ones’ birthdays, are still available to investigators.

Other methods for investigators to obtain passcodes to unlock devices without the use of passcode cracking or iCloud also exist. Researchers at the University of Massachusetts have found that wearable technology such as Google Glass and the Samsung smartwatch can employ specialized software to secretly watch a user type his or her passcode into an iPad or iPhone from nearly ten feet away or use a high-definition camera from a distance of up to 150 feet.

Though Apple’s new policy will make warranted searches more difficult to execute, there is an undeniable benefit to the public. In the past, Apple’s operating systems have included a backdoor that permitted the company to bypass passwords if the government gave them the device. However, the existence of the backdoor for lawful purposes did not limit its use to the aforementioned instances. Hackers could also exploit this loophole to remotely access private data. The elimination of the backdoor to iPhones and iPads may impede the ability of law enforcement to access the device’s data, but it also prevents other parties with more malicious intentions from accessing the data, as well.

Ultimately, the legal impact of Apple’s new encryption feature will only become clear with time. It has yet to be seen just how frequently lawful government requests for information will be undermined as a result of the encryption, especially in light of the potential for iCloud to substitute for the physical possession of a device. If individuals targeted by investigators are utilizing iCloud to back up their communications, the government will not require access to a physical device and Director Comey’s concerns will be unfounded.

With an increase in the frequency of payment services, personal photo albums, webcams, and online banking websites falling victim to hackings, the need for amplified protection of personal information has never been greater. Subsequently, if data encryption can provide more privacy for citizens at the cost of a little more red tape for warranted searches and seizures in criminal investigations, perhaps that is a price worth paying in the post-Snowden era.