Apple or the FBI… whose side are you on in the iPhone privacy battle?
So is Apple fighting for everyone's liberty? It is defying the US government's request that it must help open up the iPhone of the terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, because the software so created will compromise the integrity of every iPhone. Or is it another example of a hi-tech company bogusly invoking the threats to privacy mounted by the new digital age as a marketing strategy – and carelessly putting the lives of every citizen a little more at risk?
The US is riven by the argument, with the need for security counterbalanced with the need for personal privacy. Donald Trump has called for a boycott of Apple products, while most – but not all – of California's tech giants have lined up behind Apple. It is an argument that Britain needs to have with no less urgency. These issues confront us too, in a country perhaps far too ready to trade off personal freedom before any call for security.
The FBI wants the details of Farook's last months of calls for obvious reasons: it will reveal the extent to which he and his accomplices were lone operators or part of a terrorist network operating in the US; if the latter, there could not be a more vital interest than knowing who they are. The trouble is that the iPhone is so encrypted that the call history cannot be disclosed without the right password and will close down once 10 wrong passwords are entered. It will need special software, written by Apple, to get at what the justice and police authorities need so desperately.
The FBI and Justice Department have been careful to insist that they don't want general software. They are targeting the iPhone of just one terrorist and need Apple's one-off support to open it. President Obama, steering a path between the needs of privacy and his government's appetite for surveillance revealed by Edward Snowden, has on this case come down on the side of security. A federal judge has backed the FBI and ruled, following the All Writs Act of 1789, that the rule of law is everyone’s business: the young American republic wanted to establish it was a republic of laws and thus it was the duty of any person or any business, even if not involved directly in a case, to ensure court orders were executed. The court has ruled that Apple help the FBI in the name of the rule of law.
But Apple CEO, Tim Cook, in a letter to his customers that everyone should read sets out powerful reasons why his company should not create what would in effect be a back door not just to Farook's iPhone but to everyone's. Smartphones have become our civilisation's indispensable personal data treasure trove – details of our contacts, finances, health and private conversations are all housed in one device. As he writes: "The government suggests this tool (special software to open the phone) could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks – from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable."
Source: The Guardian
