The case of Apple and the FBI, in regards to the San Bernidino shooter’s iPhone 5c, is one of the more complex modern technological and political issues we face today. This is a case in which the FBI is demanding that Apple Inc. create a new version of its operating system to install on this iPhone so that the FBI can use a brute force entry method without erasing the iPhone’s data. (Currently after the tenth failed attempt to enter a 4 digit passcode) This is not a case of the FBI asking Apple Inc. to simply open this iPhone. The FBI is asking Apple to give the Federal Government a new operating system which would allow the FBI to bypass an important security measure. *A proper warrant has been presented to Apple Inc.* The FBI believes, and rightly so, that there is information on that iPhone pertinent to national security. This argument may be right, and the information on that iPhone may be as important as the FBI says it is, but this is not a situation only regarding this one case anymore. If Apple Inc. creates this operating system then that have opened a very large can of worms
In August 2009 Apple Inc. made one of the largest telecom business moves in history, Apple began selling their products in China. This action came after years of negotiations and concessions between the Chinese Government and Apple Inc. This deal was incredible for Apple and the global economy.
Apple’s store in Chongqing, China
The problem with this deal is China’s previous actions on intellectual property. China does not view intellectual property or private security in the same the American government does. The Chinese government has often violated the security of its citizens. If Apple creates this new operating system China could use this software if access any one of its hundreds of millions of iPhones in the country. This also broaches another issue with this legal action.
The NSA campus in Ft. Meade, Maryland.
For years now the NSA, FBI, and CIA have been fighting both domestic and international cyber security threats to companies and governments. This Defence includes both personal and industrial devices, anything from iPhones to servers. If Apple Inc. produces this operating system it will give both the federal government and international entities access to personal devices. This would be a massive shift in direction, from protecting devices to enabling unwarranted access by whom ever wants to. *this access would require a person to obtain this new operating system and then use brute force code generation to enter s device*
To add complications to the case the iPhone 5c in question belong to the shooters company and was not a personal device. *the company cooperated with the FBI and handed the device over*
In light of the risks to personal security, the national anti-terrorism intelligence gained does not seem worth it. I encourage every one reading this article to do more research on this case, and I suggest everyone think about their own stance in this case. This is almost as important as Net Neutrality, and the actions of Apple Inc. and the FBI will have ramifications across the economic and personal landscape. Apple’s refusal to create such a software is a powerful example of personal security defence and I praise Apple’s actions.
*In no way does that mean I see the actions of Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook in a positive or that I condone acts of terrorism. I believe everything should be done to stop attacks like this, but not when it harms so many. *