Big tech companies are joining Apple in its encryption fight
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A U.S. magistrate judge has ordered Apple to help the FBI break into a work-issued iPhone used by one of the two gunmen in the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California.
SAN FRANCISCO >> The tech industry is starting to line up with Apple in its fight against the federal government over the encryption it uses to keep iPhones secure.
Earlier this week, a U.S. magistrate ordered Apple to help investigators break into an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino mass shooters. Apple has until next Tuesday to challenge that ruling, setting the stage for a legal clash that could determine whether tech companies or government authorities get the final say on just how secure devices like smartphones can be.
CEO Tim Cook decried the order on Tuesday, saying it would degrade iPhone security and make users more vulnerable to spies and cyber thieves. Increasingly, other prominent tech companies agree.
“We stand with @tim_cook and Apple (and thank him for his leadership)!” Twitter chief executive Jack Dorsey wrote in a tweet Thursday afternoon.
In a statement late Thursday, Facebook said it condemns terrorism and also appreciates the essential work of law enforcement in keeping people safe. But it said it will “fight aggressively” against requirements for companies to weaken the security of their systems.
“These demands would create a chilling precedent and obstruct companies’ efforts to secure their products,” the statement said.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai had earlier voiced support for Apple in a series of tweets. “Forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users’ privacy,” Pichai wrote on Wednesday, adding that the case “could be a troubling precedent.”
Apple’s recent iPhones use encryption security that Apple itself can’t unlock. The government isn’t asking Apple to help break the iPhone’s encryption directly, but to disable other security measures that prevent attempts to guess the phone’s passcode.
Cook argues that once such a tool is available, “the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices.” Law enforcement insists that safeguards could be employed to limit use of the workaround to the particular phone at hand. On Tuesday, Cook posted a 1,117-word open letter that contended the FBI’s request might have implications “far beyond the legal case at hand.”
For months, Cook has engaged in a sharp, public debate with government officials over his company’s decision to shield the data of iPhone users with strong encryption — essentially locking up people’s photos, text messages and other data so securely that even Apple can’t get at it. Law-enforcement officials from FBI Director James Comey on down have complained that terrorists and criminals may use that encryption as a shield.
While tech companies have spoken against broad government surveillance in the past, the Obama administration has recently sought to enlist the tech industry’s help in fighting terrorism. Several companies have recently heeded the administration’s request for voluntary efforts aimed at countering terrorist postings on social media.
Civil liberties groups warned the fallout from the San Bernardino dispute could extend beyond Apple.
“This is asking a company to build a digital defect, a design flaw, into their products,” said Nuala O’Connor of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based group that has criticized government surveillance. In a statement, the center warned that other companies could face similar orders in the future.
Others said a government victory could encourage regimes in China and other countries to make similar requests for access to smartphone data. Apple sells millions of iPhones in China, which has become the company’s second-largest market.
“This case is going to affect everyone’s privacy and security around the world,” said Lee Tien, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group in San Francisco.
The case turns on an 18th-century law that the government has invoked to require private assistance with law enforcement efforts. Apple has also challenged a federal search warrant based on the same law in a Brooklyn drug case. Apple has complied with previous orders invoking that law — the All Writs Act of 1789 — although it has argued the circumstances were different.
Cook may have no choice but to mount a legal challenge, given his very public commitment to protecting customer data. Two fellows at the Brookings Institution — one of them a former lawyer for the National Security Agency — criticized that stance Thursday, writing that Apple’s “self-presentation as crusading on behalf of the privacy of its customers is largely self-congratulatory nonsense.”
Cook has made privacy protection a part of Apple’s marketing strategy, drawing a contrast with companies like Google and Facebook that sell advertising based on customers’ online behavior.
Apple “can’t be seen now as doing something that would make their products less safe,” said Wendy Patrick, who lectures about business ethics at San Diego State University. “I think everyone saw this issue coming down the pike and Apple always knew it was going to push back when the moment came.”
In doing so, Apple risks alienating consumers who put a higher value on national security than privacy. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center found 82 percent of U.S. adults deemed government surveillance of suspected terrorists to be acceptable. Apple’s stance drew fire Wednesday from GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and commentators on Fox News.
Only 40 percent of the Pew respondents said it’s acceptable for the government to monitor U.S. citizens, however. The survey also found nearly three-fourths of U.S. adults consider it “very important” to be in control over who can retrieve personal information about them.
18 responses to “Big tech companies are joining Apple in its encryption fight”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Why don’t the Feds just turn the phone over to Apple, let them unlock it and return it to the Feds thereby still protecting their security feature?
Doesn’t work that way. If the FBI just gave Apple the phone to work on it would violate the chain of custody. An attorney would argue, rightfully so, once the phone left the FBI’s control, anything could have been done to the data.
FBI would have to be there in lockstep with Apple, possibly compromising Apple’s attempt to break into the phone.
“it would violate the chain of custody”
Possibly a problem but you would also have the information, which you could corroborate in other ways.
Because, like every government program dealing with “security,” it will never stay in its original confines. The patriot act was suppose to be squarely aimed at terrorism. It has been used to go after tax evading strip clubs. Every single surveillance program we give to the government gets abused. Every one. Once Apple creates this backdoor, not only will our government demand to use it more and more frequently, but governments in China and Putin’s Kleptocracy will demand it as well. People like Winston, just don’t understand (or actually condone) why Mr. McAfee stated this is a black day. Allowing this backdoor will let formerly encrypted iMessage texts to be read by Putin’s thuggery to go after journalists revealing mass corruption. The FBI is effectively demanding over a billion people to give up their privacy and freedoms to submit to more government and more big brother in the belief that there MIGHT be something that MIGHT prevent terrorism. That is another step on the road to a police state.
I never thought I’d say this, but I agree with Glenn Beck. Apple should say no, stand firm and refuse.
“Cook argues that once such a tool is available, “the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices”
Seems to me it already is. Every time that Apple downloads patches and updates on to your IPhone operating system they are doing exactly this.
These patches have in the past involved the logon code software for IPhones, where you punch in your 4 (now 6) number code.
I believe that this is the part of the OS that the Feds want bypassed so they can look at what is on the phone.
“Every time that Apple downloads patches and updates on to your IPhone operating system they are doing exactly this.”
Huh? How is software update the same thing as removing encryption and anti-break in security measures?
Let the Supreme Court set the perimeters on what support Apple will have to commit to obtain the data the FBI is seeking? The Court will determine how far Apple will have to proceed. Chain of custody are to iindure the integrity of the evidence. If Apple cannot qualify as an expert, then who else. Privilege to operate a business rest with the State.
The rule of law never stopped the government from abusing the tools we give it to allegedly stop terrorism. Snowden proved that. The only way to stop this to never create such a tool. I find it highly disturbing that limited government types are showing their true colors and clamoring for Big Brother despite nearly two decades of recent abuse of government programs designed to stop terrorism. Show how little they really believe.
Apple is putting profits ahead of protecting American lives.
Perhaps so, but Apple is also putting liberty ahead of a police state. Not surprising you have a problem with that.
Tell me why, despite 15 years of abuse anti-terror programs, that somehow, this won’t become a routine invasion of privacy for all sorts of reasons similar to how the Traitorous *cough* I mean Patriot Act was used to go after tax evading strip clubs and how other governments with long histories of repression won’t use this to go after political dissidents. I’m not expecting you to answer. None of your peanut gallery has the guts to even think about that.
Yet another simplistic, nihilistic, faux apocalyptic straw man seasoned with a rampant inability to distinguish. Yes, government abuse is a threat, but this particular matter is blindingly (to you) simple: A decedent, the dead terrorist, has no privacy rights under the 4th amendment. Judicially approved search of criminal’s possessions, digital or otherwise, has hundreds of years of precedent behind it and rightly so. That Apple has the arrogance to place an obstacle in the path of a legitimate criminal investigation is disgusting. To not be able to ferret out the possibility of other terrorists cells by using this phone is literally insane.
And about all this whining about the government’s threat to privacy concerning Apple is somewhat humorous, given that the major tech companies ruthlessly exploit everything web users do via data mining without a whimper from the public, given the brainless march into social media, given the fact that the government you’re so terrified of ALREADY HAS EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO MAKE YOUR LIFE A LIVING HELL– IRS, FBI, EPA, and on and on.
Despite these blatantly obvious realities your view would just as effectively arm terrorists as if you’d given them bomb making material, a darkly foolish opinion, oblivious to the real threats our oppressive Federal government already poses.
Another simplistic, nihilistic, technologically ignorant post from someone who has no business using a computer.
No, this isn’t about a decedent, the dead terrorist, has no privacy rights under the 4th amendment. This is about creating a master key that will open up every single smartphone including access to previously unhackable and purely encrypted communications such as iMessage which you are sorely ignorant about. You are arguing that literally billions of people should give into Big Brother because there MIGHT be something that MIGHT prevent terrorism. And you completely ignore how despotic states will use this to persecute political dissidents and journalists. I already brought this up and you, as your regular cowardly self, refused to address this.
You also keep refusing to address how every single government program we give in the name of security gets abused. And you clearly don’t understand how the major tech companies aren’t able to read everything on your phone. You have this asinine notion that everything on your device is somehow on their server. That is not the case as evident by the number of recent hacking cases where private information was ONLY gleaned via actually hitting up phones. And the government doesn’t have such means as if it did, it would not need to request from the tech firms in the first place. You clearly do not understand technology.
Winston is outright in favor of a police state. Imagine that. I’m going to bash you on that from now on.
You don’t seem to understand that things like geographical history isn’t stored on servers, but on the phone itself. While things like StingRay (which you are also ignorant about as you are ignorant about everything), can track phones if the phone does a triangulation ping, that is not always the case. No information tech illiterates like you have this asinine notion (wait aren’t all your notions asinine?) that servers have literal backups of everything your phone has done or has on it. Obviously, you don’t have a phone because if you did, you’d realize this isn’t the case. Anyone who’s replaced a phone knows that they cannot transfer everything from a server backup. But you don’t know this because you’re ignorant as you are arrogant.
Oh, yeah. Cue the hair aflame, ad hominem nonsense.
Said the guy who cannot even address my points.
You would argue that Putin should be allowed to have his thugs view encrypted iMessage texts from journalists digging around his corruption.
Your love of police states is frightening.
I addressed the only points that matter. All the rest if fluff and hot air, not reason.
And yet ANOTHER ridiculous straw man/deflection. Predictable.
“I addressed the only points that matter.”
Which means you condone the persecution of political dissidents. Which amusingly isn’t out of character for you.
Wonder if you will still be singing your tune when Queen Hillary uses it to blackmail people she dislikes. Granting more power to the government in this aspect is a bad idea and EVERY TECH PERSON WHO IS LITERATE IN THIS FIELD AGREES.
Run away Winston. Run away as you always do from every challenge and every event of adversity that you’ve ever come across in your life.
Run away. You will always flee like a coward. Because that is your inherent nature.