US government officials from the FBI director down have said repeatedly that the FBI-Apple legal brouhaha was just about a single phone—the seized iPhone used by Syed Farook, one of the San Bernardino shooters. And just last week, James Comey, the FBI director, said his fight with Apple wasn't about setting precedent; rather, it was about battling terrorism.

But it seems that the storyline has changed.

The Justice Department now says it will not hesitate to invoke the precedent it won in its iPhone unlocking case. The authorities had obtained a court order weeks ago ordering Apple to write code to help the authorities unlock Farook's phone, all in hopes that data on it could stop another terror attack or shed light on the one that killed 14 people in San Bernardino in December. On Monday, however, the authorities said they didn't need Apple's help, asking the judge presiding over the case to withdraw the order because they had cracked the phone and obtained the desired information, all with the help of an "outside" party.

Having won the court and technological battle (although it won't disclose its unlocking method) a triumphant Department of Justice warned late Monday that its legal battle for what many say amounts to judicially ordered encryption backdoors has only just begun.

"It remains a priority for the government to ensure that law enforcement can obtain crucial digital information to protect national security and public safety, either with cooperation from relevant parties, or through the court system when cooperation fails," Melanie Newman, a Justice Department spokesman, wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "We will continue to pursue all available options for this mission, including seeking the cooperation of manufacturers and relying upon the creativity of both the public and private sectors."

The government's statement was not lost on the tech sector.

"While the DOJ consistently claimed its motion was directed at one company and one phone, the fine print reveals it believes it can coerce any company to disable its security to provide government access. This applies to any company that makes products with software," said Morgan Reed, executive director of The App Association. "App makers and IOT device makers can be forced to undermine the security that customers demand. These companies don't possess Apple’s legal resources and are targets for a government agency desperate for precedent that allows for universal access to connected devices."

Apple issued a more measured statement.

"This case raised issues which deserve a national conversation about our civil liberties, and our collective security and privacy. Apple remains committed to participating in that discussion," Apple said.

US Magistrate Sheri Pym is expected to cancel the order requiring Apple to provide assistance to the DOJ any day now.