Stratechery:
The dispute between Apple and the FBI is a much closer question than it is being framed as in most of the tech press. In large part this is because the dispute itself is being serially mischaracterized by both Apple supporters and detractors.
Apple supporters are, in my estimation, too easily conflating the security issues at hand with the more fundamental debate about encryption; detractors are trivializing the significance of the FBI’s request by suggesting they simply want Apple to unlock the phone.
My goal with this piece is to, in as plain of language as possible, lay out the issues at hand, give a framework to think about them, and explain why I am ultimately supporting Apple’s decision.
Typically clear, well-written piece by Thompson, laying out both sides of the issue. Pass this around to people who may ask you what this story is all about.
“the fact of the matter is that the data could be extracted without Apple’s help.”
Exactly what I have been saying
My opinion is that Ben’s writing on this subject has been unrelentingly weak. He comes across as not really understanding the extent of the FBI’s agenda and therefore appears to be toadying up to them. He commits the common journalistic error of trying to find “balance” without understanding that the entire spectrum has been tilted to one side by one agent and the “middle” is skewed (e.g. Fox News “Fair and Balanced”). If he were serious he’d note the extent to which Comey is lying – e.g. the “one time, just this phone” bullshit when he’s doubtless clear that Apple’s already received numerous “requests” and for them to open the door is to immediately unleash a flood. He fails to note that Apple is being compelled to write NEW CODE (first amendment violation) to destroy security for everyone and irreparably harm US interests. He fails to note that the FBI instructed San Bernardino officials to change the iCloud password and then cover up their perfidy by throwing the SB guys under the bus. Why would they instruct them to change the password? So the ready availability of backup data would not weaken their “precedent”. He fails to point out that the disgruntled postal workers (kidding, but these morons were almost certainly not connected to anyone else) who shot up their workplace had PRIVATE PHONES which they destroyed and it’s at best unlikely they’d use their WORK PHONES to plan anything anyway, so it’s silly to play the “terrorist” card as an excuse for this massive overreach. Finally, he like most lazy dirtbag “journalists” uses the hopelessly flawed Pew survey which is complete bullshit rather than the much better Marketwatch survey which shows vastly more support for Apple’s stance. The fact that he seemingly reluctantly sides with Apple is nothing but damning with faint praise. Shut up, Ben.
The biggest issue for me is that a decision against Apple is not only letting the genie out of the bottle, but also breaking the bottle into a thousand pieces. There’s no putting this toothpaste back in the tube. We already know that other law enforcement agencies will make the same demand of Apple, and anyone who thinks China isn’t going to do so as well is is simply deluding themselves. Yeah, Apple could probably keep this special iOS version secret, and maybe even if law enforcement/national security agencies could as well. However if the decision is hand over cracked iOS or never sell another device in China, Apple would be in breach of their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders if they didn’t. Then how long until China gives it to someone else they need/want something from?
One other aspect that I am not seeing discussed much… The FBI is demanding that Apple create a tool for their use that does not yet exist. If granted, where does that sort of authority stop? There is some sort of “reasonable limit” applied, but the problem is that “reasonable” is an undefined moving target. If it can include creating a new tool upon demand, it could include practically anything. The potential applications of that are way beyond just encryption or tech sector. Yes, they can get paid for it, but the ability to compel is staggering to me. McAfee has offered to break in for free. Why is the government not required to follow any avenues like that before compelling Apple? I actually see this as somewhat analogous to eminent domain; which is one of the scariest governmental powers to me.
❝my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren. F1 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Here:;/527➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsJobs/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:::::;/527..
I feel you have not taken this argument far enough. If Apple concedes to the FBI request at the end of the court process, the special iOS version is confirmed; there is no keeping its existence secret. While Apple MAY be able to keep it in house, under lock & key, it increases their risks to many bad actors, including personal risks to their staff. There is also the fact that the staff who create this backdoor can’t ‘un-forget’ their contributions to the coding. Since they have been told in the initial court order they can destroy the FBI-iOS, they presumably have to recreate it for the next 12 devices.
If Apple follows the rule of law in the USA – and they should – they also become responsible to do so in any other country where they operate. Otherwise they lose their right to sell their products there, with the repercussions you describe. The challenge to Apple from a moral perspective is that the test in some (many?) of the countries where these demands are made is not as high as in the USA. This may mean that governments in those countries come to Apple with particularly distasteful reasons to have a phone opened, but meet their country’s ‘test’. In a country lacking the constitutional freedoms of USA citizens, any dissident (presumably one of the ‘good guys’) could be subject seizure and search of their device to considerable consequence. I believe this is one of the moral objections Apple has to letting this particular Pandora’s Box.
As such, I’m not so worried about who China may give the FBI-iOS, I’m as concerned about China, or repressive regimes in other counties where these devices are used, having access to this tool in the first place.
Brilliant
Thompson, whose stuff I generally respect, is treating this like: “Yeah, you know this Hitler guy, he makes some good points – opposing threats to the Fatherland, dealing with the Jewish Scourge and the Gypsys, trying to create a master race, but, on balance, I kind of side with Neville Chamberlain.”
And it would still be encrypted. They have to use the passcode to unlock the phone in order to get to encrypted data. The fact they changed the iCloud password and stopped iCloud backups is the reason they can’t get to the data easier.