On December 2, 2015, 14 people were killed in a terrorist attack in the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. The attack consisted of a mass shooting and an attempted bombing. The two Muslim terrorists who led the attack had in prior days posted, via social media, about their affiliation with the radical group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). In researching this national security case, the FBI has collected the iPhone 5c of one of the terrorists, Syed Farook. Farook stopped backing up to the iCloud in late October, leaving his final month of conversations solely on his cellular device. In unlocking the iPhone, however, the FBI risks wiping all of the phone’s data due to Apple’s encryption design. To counteract this risk and further its investigation, …show more content…
The company is obstructing the investigation by preventing the FBI from getting the information they need to try to prevent an incident like that from happening again. Whether it breaks the customer privacy policy or not, it can potentially put other people in danger; Apple, as one of the biggest and widely known companies in the world, shouldn't want that on its back. Another reason Apple should help the FBI is because its CEO, Tim Cook, is a citizen of the US. He should find it to be one of his civic duties as an American to do what's best for his country, especially since there is terrorist attack tied to the matter.
-Mercedes Edwards ‘16
“I believe Apple should help the FBI unlock a terrorist’s phone. Although doing this risks customer privacy, it's the price we have to pay for valuable information that could keep us safe in the long run. The ideal situation would be for Apple to create a way to unlock the iPhone without deleting information just this once and keep the way to do this confidential.”
-Nellie Spackman
Apple’s iPhones are incredibly hard to hack, that the FBI can't even get in it themselves! Annoyingly, iPhone users are in trouble because the FBI is trying to get Apple to unlock an iPhone. Frighteningly, there are extremists that use iPhones to store their information in them, and if the FBI gets their hands on them, all iPhone users will be in trouble. The problem is that they don't have the right to break into somebody’s iPhone, and Apple doesn't have the information about the gunman in their database. Unfortunately, It seems the only way the FBI will get the information of lawbreakers is if they hack into their iPhones. Apple has to allow the FBI to unlock iPhones, because, they can use the information from
The backdoor it too dangerous to be created and could fall into the wrong hands.
In December of 2015, 14 people were killed and more than 20 people were injured in one of California’s most deadly shootings in recent history. A couple, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, opened fire in a conference center in San Bernardino. The two were later killed in a shootout with the police. Their case didn’t end there. The FBI searched their house, in which they found much evidence to back that this was a terrorist plot. But a crucial piece of evidence which they found was Syed Farook’s iPhone 5C. In today’s society, phones contain more information about ourselves than even we can remember. Emails, messages, notes, bank details and much more can be found on our phone. So when the FBI was able to get hold of Farook’s phone, they were more than content. But there was one more hurdle in front of them: encryption. Since we have so much information on our devices today, we have to have some form of protection against people who want to steal our personal information, scammers hackers and many. Apple has done this by encrypting almost every piece of user’s private information on their devices. The FBI wants a way around this encryption so that they can retrieve important information on Farook’s iPhone. They want Apple to create a shortcut that would allow them to bypass all of the security on Farook’s phone, but Apple is refusing saying that they want to protect their user’s privacy. Is the FBI forcing Apple to create a
The fact is that there was no way of stopping it, no way of knowing that it was coming, but now there may be. Accessing the terrorists phones could give information on who was involved. The terrorists who killed innocent people could be put in jail or be given the death penalty. The ones that died may have some justification, and the families might have a shimmer of consolation for the death of a loved one. With this software there is a possibility that future attacks could be prevented, and terrorists could be put in jail. If another group of people were planning on attacking and their information was on the phones, the FBI and Apple would be able to access it. This could lead to finding where these terrorist are, and stopping any shooting, bombing, or any type of terrorist attack from
What started as a private issue spread like wildfire as it was made public by Apple. This problem has created two sides that ask whether Apple should have the right to not oblige or if the FBI has the power to force them to make these means a reality. This specific issue opens up a greater problem that takes it outside the US and affects anyone with any kind of technology connected around the world: should the government have the right to access information on your phone? It’s a seemingly yes or no answer, but the precedent this situation will create makes it a lot more important as it can determine what the future of privacy on technology is like. When looking at the facts, rationality, and emotions that stem from whether the government should have the means
The dispute between Apple and the FBI has been one of the controversial topics since the shooting in San Bernardino. The FBI wanted Apple to help “unlock” the iPhone; however, Tim Cook, an Apple CEO, refused to provide the assistance. Mr. Cook was right about doing so because of two reasons: customers’ important information must be protected, and the FBI’s order is a dangerous precedent.
On December 2, 2015, Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook committed an act of terror, killing 14 people and injuring an additional 21 people. The couple was later linked to the terror group ISIS, prompting the FBI to attempt to gather information from Farook’s employer issued phone. The FBI pursued the US District Court of Los Angeles, which subsequently issued an order asserting Apple must provide “reasonable technical assistance” in unlocking the phone by providing three manners of assistance: allowing the government to enter more than 10 passcodes without the phone’s data being wiped, enabling automated entries rather than manual entries, and ridding of the gradually increasing delay system that occurs when multiple wrong
Terrorism is a deadly act that is becoming more consistent by the day and it needs to be stopped . When recovering the phone of a terrorist the FBI discovered that the phone had vital information on it but was protected by an encryption. The FBI then asked the company Apple to create a program to help decrypt the phone. But Apple is refusing.
One of the most prevalent battles that the American Government and the American people have continued to fight over the years is the battle of privacy vs government surveillance. Questions such as, how much is the U.S. government willing to intervene in the citizens’ lives? Or how much do they really want to know, have caused many debates and is often times left unanswered. Once again these questions have taken center stage in the wake of the recent San Bernardino shooting. With 14 people dead, the search for answers is at its peak. Many questions about the incident have been left unanswered and it is believed that the answers to these questions are locked inside a phone. However, the phone company, Apple, has resisted decrypt the phone for the F.B.I agents. Many people stand in support of the F.B.I, while others are in support of Apple, including the signees if a letter who are associated with Pen America. In “End efforts to Compel Apple to crack iPhone”, the signees used premises to justify their arguments and
I strongly believe that Apple is doing the ethical thing of not allowing the FBI to change their OS from what it is because it goes against people’s right to privacy. Yes, the intent is to protect against terrorism, but in reality, humans go too far when they have the ability to gain knowledge on something they are interested in. To elaborate, without
Although this case seems unique in matter the government has a history of invading the privacy of American companies and citizens. In 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a brief
Johnson, Jon Swartz, K., Cava, M. D., & Swartz, J. (2016, March 29). FBI hacks into terrorist's iPhone without Apple. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/03/28/apple-justice-department-farook/82354040/
March 29th, 2016, the Federal Bureau of Investigation targeted a phone that was linked to the San Bernardino attacks in California. (Three armed men opened fire upon a center for people with developmental disabilities, killing fourteen and injuring seventeen). The FBI asked Apple for their help to unlock the phone for them to investigate. Apple said absolutely not, because it would give the government a master key or backdoor to any Iphone.
The recent case between the FBI and Apple brought a worldwide ethical dilemma into the public eye, and it could have detrimental effects to the entire tech industry. The FBI wanted Apple to create backdoor access to encrypted data on one of San Bernardino shooter’s iPhones, and Apple refused just as many other large tech companies such as Amazon and Microsoft are doing nowadays. This situation creates the ethical dilemma of whether the government should have complete access to all encrypted data, and how consumers will react knowing their private data is not actually private.
The company on the forefront of this issue is Apple. After the tragic events in San Bernardino, CA on December 2, 2015, the United States FBI located an iPhone 5C belonging to one of the terrorists. The FBI, however, was unable to access the phone and formally requested Apple to unlock the device to facilitate the search for information about the killers. Apple swiftly refused and after several weeks of back and forth, the FBI filed a case against Apple (Nakashima April 2016). This case