The U.S. Justice Department wants Apple to help it access information on the iPhone of the San Bernardino shooter. What is now a public legal fight has resulted in a letter from Apple issued to its customers addressing this incident, a court order issued by a federal judge against Apple and the consequential mass public outrage.
What we know now is that the shooter possessed an iPhone 5C, and the firmware that Apple is asked to create in this iPhone would remove the automatic wipe feature that kicks in once a passcode has been incorrectly entered 10 times. We now also know that the iPhone iCloud password was reset while in government possession – just a few hours after it was taken from the shooter – meaning automatic backup of the phone’s information has been eliminated as an option.
The public’s outrage on behalf of the FBI comes from what we don’t know: what the shooter used his phone for. The information that can be extracted from this phone may help the government have a better understanding of what went on during and leading up to the shooting, along with names and information of associated people who may have aided the shooters. In the future, this software could be used again to access the information of terrorists and potentially help the government uncover terrorist sleeper cells.
Why others stand with Apple on this case has to do with privacy issues. In theory, this software that Apple is being demanded to create would be used only on this shooter’s phone. However, history shows that once something is created, it will begin to spread, often far beyond the control of the creators and their intentions. If the software is created, even as something to be used only once, then others (not just the government and Apple employees, but hackers as well) could find it and use it, compromising the privacy of iPhone (and potentially iPad, iPod, iTouch, and Mac) users to obtain confidential information about us such as credit card information, locations and safety plans. Even if we have nothing to hide, the core of this issue lies at how much privacy we are entitled to and how it can be misused. It's not an easy side to choose; by choosing privacy for ourselves, we choose it for the shooter, too.
So, who’s right? From a utilitarian standpoint, this can even be argued both ways: creating this software could potentially prevent similar crimes from happening and make it harder for terrorists and criminals to use devices to stay in touch, but keeping information safe from other people would better ensure the privacy of Apple device users. Some may be wary of both parties’ intentions in this case – Apple and ally companies such as Facebook are brave to speak out against the FBI’s demands, but this is also a smart business move to build audience trust in its products.
For now, all we can really do is stay informed on the case and its implications while thinking about what we want. It doesn’t have to be a choice between safety and privacy – we still don’t know how much this software would even help the government’s investigation into the shooting, but we do know the potential effects of it. After all, this issue has been around even before last 2015 when Apple CEO Tim Cook pointed out, “If you put a key under the mat for the cops, a burglar can find it too.”
