Your Opinion on the Controversy Between Apple & the FBI
Hello WAers:
I am working on writing an article about the battle between Apple and the US Government over Apple's refusal on the FBI's backdoor request into the iPhone. I am not sure who has heard the latest about the battle between Apple computer and the FBI.
Here is the story in a nutshell:
After the San Bernandino shooting in California, USA, the US government has demanded a backdoor to break into the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone. They of course are stating it is imperative to get information that could convict the assailants and put them away for a long time. Apple does not wish to do that and here are some of their reasons:
1. Privacy implications.
2. Opens the door to hackers. As Tim Cook says by creating a backdoor that doesn’t exist as of right now means opening it up to be exploited by cybercriminals. Presently, the iPhone is encrypted with an algorithm that Apple itself cannot break. If Apple were to create such a backdoor, it would not take too long before hackers could break the code and exploit this. Too many incorrect guesses at a password and the phone will automatically erase its memory.
3. Apple says it is bad for business. The Blackberry had a one-time reputation for security and that is what made it the phone of choice in the US Government and private business sectors. Everyone loved this phone because of it. Once it gave in to various governments’ demands for ways to access customer messages, that reputation—and Blackberry’s fortunes—took a hit. Apple and Google have come a long way since then in developing security features that make it impossible for the companies themselves to break into the devices. Succumbing to FBI pressure now will significantly hurt Apple’s image on the security front.
I would love to hear other opinions for research into my article and get some ideas of different angles. I have a new section on WA site for Newsworthy events relating to technology. And I am working on this and could use some input from like-minded intelligent tech-savvy individuals such as yourself.
Recent Comments
45
I think the courts will have to step in and render their best judgment. I don't think there is a 100% right or 100% wrong to this issue. It's the concerns of law enforcement versus commitments and agreements that Apple made.
I'm not a fan of politics, and enjoy the "more positive" engagements in life. But since we are speaking respectfully, with no statements, and just opinions...
I really, strongly feel that the FBI has all the information that they need to close the door on the sad incident that happened in San Bernardino.
So the only explanation why they would need Apple's help with "breaking/hacking" someone's phone would to use Apple as their "source" of information. Why?
Well privacy and security have been big issues for us, Americans, for the past decade and half. For the FBI to come out and say "we found this and that information in individual's phone", and then for reporters/media will then say "well good job, how did you do it?". So instead of the FBI saying "we used techniques that violate American privacy laws and security", the FBI wants to be able to say "this information was given to us by Apple, and all questions related to their technique can be answered by them".
The FBI wants to have clean hands in the eyes of the public. Simply put, call Apple the FBIs scapegoat.
Every time I read about this issue though, I kind of laugh inside about while in FBI custody, the Apple ID password associated with the attacker’s iPhone was changed.
Upon reading articles off WA, I learned that the FBI has dozens of cases relating to this incident, and thousands of requests from law enforcement waiting on the issue to help them out as well. But different from the others, this is the only that deals with terrorism.
Apple is a great company, not some private government sector, by no means should they be ordered to do the government's dirty work and change the one thing that they have always been driven by and valued as a company: security.
Thank you Scott! I will have to track down the other articles you said that have been written on WA about this issue.
You mention "politics" which was curious to me, because as I replied to another comment, this has nothing to do with politics. It is an issue of technology and Internet Security which are issues we are learning about here at WA.
Thank you again Scott. Have a great day!
Sorry for not clarifying myself, but the articles were read off (away) from WA sites; huffington post, msn, etc.
And in my opinion, it has plenty to do with politics. The FBI is part of the US Department of Justice; Politics is a synonym for government; Government controls regulations and laws regarding technology and Internet Security.
You have a good day as well!
I can also see both sides but I think I side with Apple. Where would they draw the line if creating a backdoor? It could easily cross the line of being used for bad things.
Hi Steph,
I side with apple, just because anything the govt gets is abused by politics. I hate to give the criminals privacy, but if we give up ours, the criminals win. They simply need to follow the money, that is the end point of all crime anyway.
Chas
Good luck with your blog thread here Steph because if you get anybody with views contrary to what I suspect will be the concensus, be prepared for them to be shouted down.......in the nicest possible way of course;-)
It's why I spend so little time in forums these days, you're not allowed to hold contrary views because if you do, the thread rapidly descends into personal jibes.
A good subject though Steph, even though I won't be giving my two penny worth.
Mark
Hi Mark:
I appreciate and respect your views. I disagree, however with the concept that I am "not allowed" to post this blog. The rules of the WA blogs are pretty clear. Here is my training on Rules of WA Blogs: Rules of WA Blogs This post has nothing to do with politics or religion. I am positive that the folks at WA can be professional about their opinions regarding the development of technology and whether or not it should be created. That is what we are all about after all - learning new technology.
Have a great day Mark. :)
Steph
Hi Steph,
I'm not at all sure how you came about the idea that you should be "not allowed" to post your blog, I believe it's a worthy subject to debate and don't think it's outside WA's rules at all so I'm a little confused by your response. I've re-read my post but can't see where you would have gained the impression that you shouldn't be blogging on the subject, that's certainly not my view.
I'd also concur about the good folks here at WA land but, and it is a considered but, threads where there are contentious issues often descent into mudslinging.......not necessarily here but in forums in general, that's all I was saying.
People start out with good intentions but often, in an increasing effort to make or "prove" their point, those good intentions dissipate and the "I'm right you're wrong, you idiot" stuff creeps in.
That's the only point I was making by the way, the subject matter is valid and I do have a view on it based on what I've read on this side of the pond, but it shall remain unsaid.
Cheers Steph, hope that clarifies my position.
Enjoy your Thursday:-)
Mark
Hi Steph,
I can see both sides, I really can. I would propose this solution: Apple gives the FBI what they want with the promise that the FBI funds and co-develops with Apple the next generation of Apple security for their devices.
Gov's would love to be able to break into everybody's devices with the excuse of potential illegal threats.
If Apple gives in, then the FBI, or anyone, will be able to monitor us even more.
And who is watching the police? All that info in the wrong hands (and Gov is the wrong hands), and 1984 will arrive.
I use for my own privacy a number of systems.
And yes, privacy matters:
https://www.ted.com/talks/glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matters
I support here Apple.
Cheers!
I like that! And I agree. The govt does use the excuse of needing the information for criminal prosecution purposes, but what they are proposing would cause more problems than solutions. Thank you for providing feedback. :)
See more comments
I agree with Apple. The only way I could see any justification for the FBI to force Apple to unlock the phone is if they had direct and verified information of an imminient threat, and the key to unlock, stop the threat is on this phone, otherwise it just becomes a fishing trip and a very long slippery slope to no privacy.
I like your views and this could lead to problems with Internet Security which I think is the primary problem not to mention the possibility of hackers getting a hold of the technology and creating more havoc.