There is a fair bit both individuals and Apple could do to FBI-proof their phones and shield private information from investigators and cybercriminals. Those measures include multiple difficult for law enforcement to crack. “They are walking on a tightrope,” says Mark Bartholomew, a law professor at the State University of New York at Buffalo who specializes in privacy and encryption issues. In a recent letter to customers, in noted that it has routinely built progressively stronger protections into is products because cyberattacks have only become more frequent and more sophisticated. Apple has resisted the government saying that maintaining that software that opens a single iPhone could be exploited to hack into millions of other devices. As of now, Apple’s focal point is on the current battle with the FBI in a federal court while also trying to sway public opinion in the company’s favor. The purpose is to inform the reader on how to shield private information from investigators (“Turns our there’s a fair both individuals and Apple could do to FBI-proof their phones…” paragraph 2). The audience is the people as …show more content…
The article appeals to ethos by stating that the public’s privacy rights should not be compromised. (“…software that opens a single iPhone could be exploited to hack into millions of other devices…” paragraph 7).
. The article appeals to pathos by making reference to the San Bernardino massacre to vindicate the governments reasoning behind them wanting Apple to unlock an iPhone used by the one of the San Bernardino killers. (“In the current fight, the FBI aims to make Apple help it guess the passcode on the work phone used by Syed Farook before he and his wife killed 14 people at an office party in December” paragraph 7).
. The article appeals to logos by making reference to the U.S. Supreme Court as they try to reason whether or not Apple should unlock the phone.(“The skirmish could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court” paragraph
The fight between the apple and the fbi brought much controversy. Many said it was apple’s patriotic duty to help stop more potential terrorist attacks but they don’t understand the danger involved. The fbi asked apple to weaken their security system to hack into the iphone of one of the san bernardino shooter and then once they were done they could patch it up or just give access to law enforcement. But even with the weakened security it would have taken years to access the information and you can't just have certain people have access. As hackers will also get access stealing people’s personal information. And it would never end as countless law enforcement divisions have hundreds of iphones that need to be unlocked. So
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
Meanwhile law officials are saying that the quality of their equipment to get into gadgets are low.But then Apple says that opening the phone leads to other problems like violation of the customer’s rights and privacy. Apple has protested that it is not right for the F.B.I. to go behind their back and have a third party join and decrypt the password.Apple also said that the government had forced them to try to open it for them and or to create a new way to unlock Mr.Farook’s phone and considered it to be forced speech and viewpoint of discrimination which violates the first amendment.The Apple had also said that the government had violated Apples Fifth Amendment right which says they allowed to dothings without the governments comments.They
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
Millions of American citizens rely on Apple to protect their data. This data includes private conversations via emails and text messages, bank account information and location data. It is protected under a security system called encryption; encryption prevents criminals from accessing this important information. In the letter “A Message to Our Customers”,
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
My topic for the research paper will focus on the Apple vs FBI case with the San Bernardino terrorist shootings and the FBI requesting to gain access to the killers locked phone. I will review whether the FBI has the right to gain access to the phone and if Apple has the right to not help out the FBI with gaining access to the phone. I will also bring up alternatives that the FBI could use to get into the phone. My personally opinion is I don’t have an issue with the FBI trying to gain access to the terrorist shooters phone if it will help to prevent further attacks against the United States and allies. The reason FBI officials want access to the phone is there is encrypted data in the terrorist phone and its GPS system which may hold vital
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/
Final Exam Direct Quote In December of 2015, a huge controversy broke out when the U.S. Government was trying to force Apple to invent a software to be able to unlock the phone of a man who had killed multiple people in a horrifying act of terror. Although Apple realizes that this act was far beyond okay, they do not want to create the software that would allow the Government to access our private information. In a letter to Apple customers, Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, further argues this statement when he says, “The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge” (Cook). As people take sides in this issue, they really need to understand that when they’re
This significance of this decision is explained by the fact that the true problem lies ahead and will thus be affected by it. An independent security researcher Graham Cluley points out that “it will be a different technology company having demands made of it - perhaps a company which doesn't have as much of a backbone (or the legal funds) that Apple did." He expresses his concerns that in the future the FBI will encounter a situation in which they are not able to get what they want and will consequently drive software engineers to go against their ethical standards and perform tasks that would jeopardize the privacy and security of millions [8]. Apple’s insistence on privacy has protected smaller companies that might not have the finances
The case of Apple Vs FBI is basically the FBI trying to have Apple change their operating system (OS) in their phones so they can be encrypted if they need to be. Currently, Apple phones are set up to protect against hacking. The FBI wants to gain this access so they can stop a terrorist from being able to use mobile technology as means of harm and to gain knowledge of what the attack could be.
Now for the case that has kept the nation on the edge of their seats, we have Apple v. FBI. This has really split the nation as people are torn apart by wanting to side with the makers of their beloved iPhone or the government that has given many their freedom. This all started with a tragedy, unfortunately, the tragedy the San Bernardino shooting. After the terrorists were killed, the FBI obtained the iPhone from one of the shooters and believed that they could find more information in it. They turned to Apple in order to open up the phone, as iPhones are set to ‘self-destruct’ all data after 10 failed password attempts. Apple flat out refused. In a letter to the public sent out by Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, said, “Once the... way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.” This essentially is saying that someone could come along after the phone had been
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.
Nowadays, technology is speeding our way of communication and the way in which we handle our personal lives. Zdziarski (2008) described, “How the iPhone has quickly become a market leader in technology and has been a big success around the world” (preface.iX). The iPhone has become a very useful tool in many aspects of people lives. However, people should be aware that this device can store a great amount of data in its memory and that if you ever lost or had it stolen all off your personal and professional information can be available to whoever has it in their hand.
In today’s society, technology has become one of the most used and most sought after developments of the millennium. In a recent case the FBI petitioned for Apple to unlock the phone of Syed Farook, the man responsible for shooting and killing 14 people in San Bernardino, California. The FBI believed Apple should create a new software that would not erase the data from iPhones after ten failed attempts to unlock the phone. Apple replied that they had a responsibility and an obligation to protect the privacy of their customers. Supporters of Apple 's response have argued, creating a new software was not a wise decision. In the past, government agencies have been known for their abuse of power. Had Apple chosen to create a master key for this particular case, there would be no limit to government invasion of privacy. In the end Apple could have potentially lost costumers by changing the protection of their cellular products. The issue has already been raised that creating software to access one locked device could potentially open the door for hackers to invade millions of other people’s devices. I agree that Apple should not create a new software to unlock the phone because once a master lock is created there are no limitations to who or how the coding can be used.