If the question is how best to keep Americans safe from terrorists, there are no simple answers in the dispute between technology giant Apple Inc. and the federal government.
Last week, a judge ordered Apple technicians to provide help in hacking the iPhone left behind by Syed Farook, who in December, with his wife, killed 14 people in a shooting in San Bernardino, Calif. FBI officials have been unable to pierce the encryption on the phone, which might or might not contain clues to the terrorists’ planning and to whether or not the attackers had outside assistance. The company has been instructed to provide source code for the phone’s operating system, which the FBI could download and thereby gain access to the device’s secrets.
The judicial order is on hold while Apple executives prepare a response, and on Tuesday company CEO Tim Cook released an open letter to customers. “The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true,” Cook wrote. “Once created, this technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices.”
As The Seattle Times wrote editorially: “Imagine if the government forced the leading lock manufacturer to give police a master key so they could have unfettered access to search and seize material in your home.” That might be a stretch, considering that government officials are seeking a one-time exception, but the case does bring into sharp relief the issue of privacy not just for terrorists, but for all Americans. Considering that the United States was founded as a revolt against intrusive and oppressive government, it is an issue that speaks to the very heart of the nation and the very notion of civil liberties.
Among the revelations is that there is, indeed, an apparent method for hacking Farook’s phone, something that Apple representatives long have said is impossible. As Leonid Bershidsky wrote for Bloomberg View: “Apple is acknowledging that it isn’t encryption that protects the personal data of its customers, but the company’s stubborn insistence on keeping its software proprietary.”
Encryption turns messages into code that can be read only by the sender and the intended recipient. It is what allows us to securely send email and text messages, or safely access bank accounts online. As The Washington Post wrote in an explainer about encryption (tinyurl.com/hu26383), “If you don’t have the key, the encrypted data will look just like gibberish.”
While law enforcement officials have said that encryption makes it more difficult to track terrorists or potential terrorists, weakening such protections would, in truth, make Americans less secure. Forcing technology companies to build a back door into their devices would leave open a path that inevitably would be exploited by hackers, terrorists, or foreign governments. As The Chicago Tribune wrote editorially, “If there’s a back door for law enforcement, you can be sure someone will steal the keys, pilfer information, perhaps even sabotage this country’s power grid or transportation systems.”
All of that seems a long way from a single instance of forcing Apple to provide the keys for a single phone. And while allowing for the breaking of encryption is slightly different from what Apple has been ordered to do, both issues should be part of a nuanced discussion about the precarious balance between national security and individual freedom. The key to any such discussion will be a sober analysis of what measures truly keep us safe, and which ones are simply government overreach.
