Apple made a big splash last week when CEO Tim Cook published an open letter in response to the FBI’s request and subsequent court order to hack the iPhone of the primary assailant in December 2015’s San Bernadino mass shooting. As one might expect, Mr. Cook basically told the government that they would not comply, and fortunately, they might be the one company that could afford to fight this battle in the courts. Though the tech industry has typically maintained a similar stance on device encryption, even the most staunch champions of digital privacy such as Google and Twitter have had suprisingly muted responses to the growing battle. Also revealing is a recent Pew poll that suggests while the tech industry may be largely united on device encryption and government backdoors, the American public isn’t quite sure what to think about this complex issue.
What this means for you:
Late model iPhones ship with encryption enabled by default, and as long as you enable some form of authentication on your device, the data on that device will only be accessible if you unlock it. Law enforcement can’t break the encryption, and Apple, by it’s own admission, cannot decrypt your phone’s contents with out the proper authentication, even if the phone owner asks them to do so. If someone tries too many times to guess your pin, the device will be automatically wiped – no intervention from Apple or your carrier is required. The FBI is demanding Apple create a way for them to unlock the iPhone of the San Bernadino shooter, which if Apple were to actually accomplish such a feat, could theoretically allow anyone with possession of this backdoor to decrypt any iPhone protected by similar technology. Like the atomic bomb, the development of this backdoor cannot be unmade, nor will it remain only in the hands of the “righteous”. While the data on the SB shooter’s phone may prove useful in providing some closure to the incident and may even help further other domestic terror investigations, it’s easy to see that the FBI means for this case to set a precedent that will give them unfettered access to an area that has traditionally been protected, both by law and by technology.
