- Justin Lane/European Pressphoto Agency
Today’s edition of The Morning Download, which addressed the FBI’s retreat from its legal battle with Apple Inc., led to a number of thoughtful responses from readers. The FBI admitted in court that it was able to crack the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone without Apple’s help. The government on Monday said it would drop its controversial demands for the company’s technical assistance in the case.
The case is over for the time being, although Apple and other tech companies could at any moment face renewed government pressure to write software that aids law enforcement efforts. The existence of at least one demonstrable security weakness in the iPhone has been established, although the government didn’t say how it cracked the device, an older version of the iPhone that doesn’t necessarily have much bearing on the security of newer models.
Some critics have maintained that it was clear from the start that the government could have cracked the iPhone without Apple’s help. Edward Snowden made that case earlier this month, when he said that the security systems could have been overcome by “attacking” the hardware of the device, and that it wasn’t necessary to enlist Apple’s aid in writing software to break the encryption. He argued that convenience, and something more fundamental, drove the Justice Department’s demands. The Morning Download revisited that point earlier today, in a post entitled “FBI’s Retreat from Apple Battle Is Remarkable.”
As Edward Snowden said earlier this month: “They frame this false choice between security and privacy. But you can have both … Surveillance isn’t about safety. It’s about power.”
That final point about the government’s motivations touched a nerve with a number of readers, who said it went too far. “Agreed, that the retreat is remarkable — thanks for the comments,” said Dale Henn, of St. Louis, who described himself as a retired vice president of capital and facilities at Gannett Co. Inc.
He continued, in an email, which we quote in full below:
About the concept, “Surveillance isn’t about safety. It’s about power.” Perhaps true in a police state or totalitarian. Hardly relevant in the context of the U.S. vs Apple. The FBI is doing all it can to protect U.S. citizens, as it should. There is a reasonable discussion to be had about privacy vs. security. That’s happening. A great result in a democratic society.
Claiming the FBI effort is about power denigrates the difficult job the FBI has to keep us safe in a world with terrorists. The FBI went to court — they didn’t arrest or try to indict Apple/Apple employees/management.
How should the debate be resolved, publicly and legally which is happening. Should Apple be forced to hack IOS to help the FBI, I don’t think so, but the courts should decide, if necessary. One of the bedrocks of our democracy is rule of law. Another is transparency. Another is free speech. All at work in this discussion.
Painting the FBI as power hungry is unfair and untrue.
How do you view the latest twist in the battle between the FBI and Apple? Leave a comment below, and let us know.
Commercial entities are strongly motivated not to betray the trust of the public. If they do, and they're caught, which is likely, their life blood will be drained away by their customers' desertion. The government has no lifeblood but taxes, which do not depend for their collection on anyone's good will. Which of the two do you trust?
Apple needs to follow the law like everyone else and provide assistance with search warrants. Just because the All Writs Act is old doesn't make it obsolete, it just proves how fundamental it is.
If Apple intentionally designs a phone to be impenetrable to law enforcement, then it's their duty to help when asked. The CEO protests too much. There's no general "backdoor" risk to everyone if each phone under warrant has to be physically brought to some secret decoding room at Apple.
Since most folks are more concerned with public safety than "backdoors", Apple has really hurt its reputation with its unreasonable stance. Hello, board of directors? Time for a new CEO.
How should Apple respond to requests for cracking phone security from Britain? France? Russia? China? Iran? Syria? How do you differentiate. Whatever precedent is set will be set for all of the countries where Apple has a direct or indirect presence.
No more Apple products for me. Shame on Apple. If any involved party has an inflated sense of their own power, it's them.
"...Painting the FBI as power hungry is unfair and untrue..."
Well please examine the timeline of events.
The "terrorist incident" occurs, very soon thereafter later Pres. Obama addresses the media to assure that there isn't any indication of a terrorist network involved. Evidently, the POTUS has seen the "intel" contained in icloud backup storage of the iphone in question, otherwise just how could he make a statement like that? based upon speculation..that doesn't make any sense to a *rational thinking human being*
.
Just several days later apparently the FBI "accidentally" resets the password to the back up icloud storage.
Then a full 75 days pass, and Apple learns from the media that it is being sued by the Justice Department.
One would wonder why the FBI waited 75 days to hack an iphone.. (which we just learned that the FBI had the capability from beginning,.. what?.. do you think Celebrite hadn't already knew how to hack an iphone5 years ago?),
The FBI could have very easily hack the iphone with the aid of 3rd party tech company months ago.
Why wait 75 days to sue Apple for "intel" the FBI and POTUS had from the onset?
A legal argument based upon 200+ yr old "All Writs Act" which a federal court in New York ruled against the FBI. An argument that could have been tied in appeals for years.
If "national security", and "lives at stake' were the true pressing urgent issue then why not hack the iphone immediately?
Why did the Justice Dept. make a lame legal argument that would have been tied up appeals for years if were truly a "national security" issue.