Get A Free Quote NOW




Apple VS FBI: Private Safety or Public Safety?

You are currently viewing Apple VS FBI: Private Safety or Public Safety?
  • Post category:News

The debates over iPhone encryption have been going on for a while now, and Apple has agreed that it is up to Congress now to decide who can access your personal digital data. At FBI they say that Apple’s security is like a vicious guard dog, while the cell phone maker is dedicated to protecting consumers privacy.

The debates started when FBI asked Apple to unlock the iPhone used by a shooter responsible for deadly shooting in San Bernardino that happened in December. Apple says that FBI asked them to weaken the security of their products and it is not right to make the society less safe in general in order to solve a crime.

After attention has shifted from the courts to Congress, the deep disagreement between the Obama administration and the Silicon Valley became obvious, even though the government is set for open dialogue.

In Brooklyn, the administration did not make Apple give them access to a phone tied to a drug case. But in California a magistrate judge directed the company to assist FBI with hacking into the phone used by one of San Bernardino shooters responsible for death of 14 people. The phone is an iPhone 5C and a health inspector Syed Farook was the one who used it. He and his wife died in a gun battle with the police.

It is time for Congress to get involved deciding this issue between public safety and private safety.

The FBI wants special software that would hack into encrypted phones and help access their data. If Apple provides the FBI with such software, it would only take 26 minutes to test postcodes in quick succession bypassing security protocols.

There was a mistake when the FBI asked the county that owned the phone to reset the iCloud password. If the password was not reset, the investigators could have reached a fresh back-up of the phone and examine it. Still, there is no way to get all the data from the back-up.

Darrel Issa, a Republican Rep of California, wonders if the FBA asked Apple to provide the source code (underlying software) before forcing the phone maker into creating a tool to hack their own security. He also thinks the FBI did not do everything possible to resolve the problem before going to court. Issa also said that while the government was dedicated to resolving the issue, Apple did not offer any alternatives to help them with that.

There are now 205 phones that can’t be used in criminal investigation because investigators cannot access them.

As the technologies of encryption and security keep developing, it is possible that it is time for law enforcement to find a new way to gather evidence. People should be able to trust the devices they use with their private information. Companies must secure their customers, not spy on them, but if the government prevails, not much can be done to prevent it.

This Post Has 3 Comments

  1. Michael

    Under no circumstance should Apple weaken the security of their devices in order for law enforcement agencies to use when they see fit. I agree that law enforcement agencies should find a new way to gather evidence. I do not think hacking into phones should be their final answer, although I do think if anything is going to be done by Congress, it would be that after a certain protocol or chain of command or for particular circumstances, Apple should be mandated to work with agencies to get the desired information. I think Apple should actually have a division in their office that liaisons with law enforcement agencies to bring criminals to justice. I mean, I am sure Apple doesn’t want every criminal copping their devices for ease of use, as that would ruin their reputation.

    For a drug case, I can see why a Brooklyn judge would not mandate Apple to initiate a hack into their system for access to the phone, but when it comes to murder, especially that of 14 people, I can see why the California magistrate instructed the company to help hack into the phone used by Syed Farook.

    I agree that companies must secure their customers and if Congress totally takes away Apple’s ability to do that, since the security of their devices is a huge part of who they are, it would be unfair.

  2. gabriela

    the technologies of encryption and security keep developing, it is possible that it is time for law enforcement to find a new way to gather evidence. People should be able to trust the devices they use with their private information. Companies must secure their customers, not spy on them

  3. Kathy

    Hhmmm very interesting. I don’t feel law enforcement should have this special software because they will probably end up abusing this right. But in cases like a shooting, I feel they should be able to access the phone the phone for evidence. I say it must be a court ordered thing and I feel an apple representative and the police should do it together…in other words the police should not know how to do this. Apple unlocks it and the police can get their evidence. It’s only fair to everyone who owned an iPhone!

Leave a Reply