Subscribe

Google, WhatsApp, and Microsoft side with Apple in FBI encryption case (+video)

Google CEO Sundar Pichai, WhatsApp CEO Jan Koum, and a coalition of tech companies including Microsoft are defending Apple's refusal to bypass iPhone encryption. Here are the arguments for and against building a 'backdoor' into communications.

  • close
    Apple CEO Tim Cook, shown here at an event in Milan, Italy on November 15, 2015, argued this week that Apple should not be forced to bypass its own encryption software.
    Luca Bruno/AP/File
    View Caption
  • About video ads
    View Caption
of

When the FBI obtained a court order asking Apple for its help in unlocking the iPhone of San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook, Apple took a bold step: it refused.

“The U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone,” Apple CEO Tim Cook wrote on Tuesday in a letter to customers.

The FBI argues that it could obtain valuable intelligence from the communications and location data stored on Mr. Farook’s iPhone 5C, and that this intelligence could save lives by preventing terror attacks in the future. In a statement supporting the FBI’s case, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr wrote, “Court orders are not optional and Apple should comply. In this case, under a valid court order, Apple has been asked by the FBI to unlock a government owned cell phone to assist in the investigation of a terror attack that killed 14 Americans.”

Recommended: 40 iPhone tips and tricks everyone should know

FBI Director James Comey has argued that encrypted communications, such as Apple’s iMessage platform, allow criminals and terrorists to “go dark,” making it difficult for law enforcement agencies to identify individuals who are planning violent acts. Without the cooperation of telecommunications carriers and tech companies such as Apple, Mr. Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee last summer, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies “may not be able to identify and stop terrorists who are using social media to recruit, plan, and execute an attack in our country.” 

But Apple holds that the FBI’s limited request – that it disable certain iPhone security features to allow the FBI to access Farook’s iPhone through brute-force password guessing – sets a dangerous precedent by undermining the security measures that keep the communications of law-abiding citizens safe.

On Wednesday, Google CEO Sundar Pichai sided with Apple, tweeting, “Forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users’ privacy … [Tech companies] give law enforcement access to data based on valid legal orders. But that’s wholly different than requiring companies to enable hacking of customer devices & data. Could be a troubling precedent.”

Apple was also supported by WhatsApp cofounder and CEO Jan Koum, who wrote in a Facebook post, “We must not allow this dangerous precedent to be set. Today our freedom and our liberty is at stake.” And Reform Government Surveillance (RGS), a coalition of tech companies including Microsoft, AOL, Google, Apple, and others, released a statement saying, “Technology companies should not be required to build in backdoors to the technologies that keep their users' information secure. RGS companies remain committed to providing law enforcement with the help it needs while protecting the security of their customers and their customers' information.”

Broadly, tech companies have argued that a tool built for a specific purpose – unlocking the iPhone of a single terrorist – could fall into the hands of hackers or criminals, allowing them to unlock others’ phones. Apple also worried in its letter that the government could expand its powers in the future to compel tech companies to build surveillance software or otherwise spy on their users.

Apple will appeal the FBI’s request to the Californian district court that made the order; if the order still stands after appeal, Apple may choose to elevate the case to a higher court.

About these ads
Sponsored Content by LockerDome
 
 
Make a Difference
Inspired? Here are some ways to make a difference on this issue.
FREE Newsletters
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.
 

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Save for later

Save
Cancel

Saved ( of items)

This item has been saved to read later from any device.
Access saved items through your user name at the top of the page.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You reached the limit of 20 saved items.
Please visit following link to manage you saved items.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You have already saved this item.

View Saved Items

OK