The FBI is attempting to gain access to the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino shooters from the attack on Dec. 2, 2015.
The problem the FBI is facing is that the phone is protected by a passcode and the iOS software on the phone is programmed to erase the contents of the phone after ten attempts to guess the passcode.
Apple does not have access to the information in the phone because the phone is encrypted for the privacy of the users, however, the FBI is asking Apple to create a new software that creates a bypass around the limit of passcode attempts.
In a letter to their customers, Apple CEO, Tim Cook, stated in regards to the proposed new software, “The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor.”
This brings up the other side of the story and the question that needs to be asked: Should Apple create the software and comply with the FBI?
According this quote, Apple is defending its customers’ privacy on the premise that once a software of such power is created, it could potentially fall into the wrong hands. On the other side, the FBI is stating that the software would only be used on this one occasion for this one phone.
However, what happens the next time the government needs access to an iPhone that is evidence in a crime?
While the FBI has a substantial argument in the fact that this is an issue of national safety and they are trying to get to the bottom of this terrorism, the software won’t just become available and then disappear. The technology they are asking for, once created, will never go away.
After the software is created, one might be able to destroy the program, however, the team that uses it will still know how it works. Once the FBI has used this “backdoor”, they would have a general knowledge of how to do it again.
What Apple is doing is standing up and refusing to go down without a fight, with the idea of protecting their customers’ privacy.
Journalism professor Kyu Ho Youm said, “Apple wanted to let the rest of the world know that they are eager to challenge the extraordinary attempt on the part of the government to force them to do something against their will.”
Apple isn’t allowing the government to simply walk in and take away someone’s privacy, for one thing Apple doesn’t invade privacy, that is why the information is out of their reach and why the phone was encrypted in the first place.
Apple is questioning the situation in a sense and is not creating this software at the drop of a hat, but they have been complying with the FBI in all ways accept for this “backdoor” option.
In the same letter from Apple, Cook states, “While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products.”
It is important for the FBI to work against terrorism, and for us to recognize that what happened in San Bernardino should not be taken lightly, but Apple is right in refusing to build the new software.
There is a huge potential privacy risk if it is created, as well as the threat of it falling into the wrong hands or being abused in other, less pressing cases than the shooting in San Bernardino.
We need to be thinking about preventing threats and not creating new ones in regards to the privacy of Americans.
Bergstrom: The reason Apple refused the FBI
Desiree Bergstrom
February 28, 2016
0
More to Discover