Prompt 7: Contemplating Controversy Apple Fights the FBI

By Xavier Reinders

Tech Today's characterization of the Apple vs FBI fight

Around February of last year a case developed in a federal court in California that took the shape of Federal Bureau of Investigation vs. Apple. The case was centered around an IPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters who killed 14 people in December of the previous year. The FBI had demanded that Apple unlock the phone so that it could be searched and its data used to possibly prevent future attacks or take down other suspects. Apple stated they could not do that as the device was encrypted even to them and they refused to develop a program for decryption. On one side of the FBI argues they need access to these phones through the encryption to protect the United States and its citizens. Apple on the other hand states that it is imperative to the security of their phones that not even they can crack the encryption. This case represents more than just the one phone, it is setting a precedent for data privacy and is an important marker in the balancing act between freedom and security.

To the credit of the FBI their job is to protect the people of the United States from domestic threats and like all other national security agencies around the world information is their greatest resource and weapon. The agency stated that encryption used by companies like Apple make it “harder for them to solve cases and stop terrorist attacks,” according to this CNBC article. The agency insisted the unlock would be a one time thing stressing the importance of time so that the information on the phone can be used while it is still relevant. The FBI argue that unlocked phone is a small price to pay for prevention of future loss of life. It is the belief of the agency that were a backdoor created it would be far more beneficial than it would be destructive.

Cartoon depicting the concerns of Apple and the Tech industry

If broken down into the typical security vs freedom debate Apple fights for the side of freedom on this one. Tim Cook, Apple CEO, said that the FBI’s request to unlock the encrypted device was “chilling[…]if the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your IPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device.” This is discussed more in this CNBC article. Apple’s, along with most of the rest of the tech industry’s, concern is that once anyone gets their foot in the privacy door, there is no telling what could get inside or be pulled out. Most companies, Apple included, protect against this by not even placing their own foot in their own door, meaning that their encryption software makes it so that even they cannot decrypt it. The industry's concern is that if anyone can get in then everyone can and privacy becomes non-existent within the digital realm.

The case was dropped by the FBI when a third party, suspected to be an Israeli company, helped them to unlock the device. Although this outcome settles the case with an acceptable outcome for both sides; FBI get their phone, Apple keeps their encryption back door free, it does not settle what will surely be a lengthy debate of privacy and freedom versus security and protection. And it leaves new problems for both sides, the FBI still has no consistent way to unlock encrypted devices and Apple has a hole in their security exposed by the unnamed third party.