Do you remember the iPhone hacking/privacy that was being talked about earlier this year? As a refresher, in December 2015, an attack in San Bernardino County in
California left 14 dead and 22 injured. An Apple iPhone was recovered from one
of the attackers, which was considered a potential source of important
information to the case. As the owner was deceased and the phone protected by a
4-digit password, the FBI petitioned Apple for a way to break the security
measure to access the information contained in the phone. However, citing the
company’s policy to protect the privacy of their customers, Apple refused the
request. Their argument was that such an action would “take an unprecedented
step which threatens the security of our customers.” Though the FBI eventually
won the legal battle to retrieve the information, the actual process was
handled through a third party - or in other words, some illegitimate hackers.
The FBI had hoped to find information on the attacker’s
contacts, which would have potentially led to more information about the
attacks or if there were more attacks planned or more people involved. They
cited the All Writs Act and connected obtaining the information to a matter of
security. Apple saw the forced disclosure of information as a breach of privacy
and a violation of the first amendment, calling the forced delivery of
code-breaking software “compelled speech”.
In my opinion, even though the case
made by Apple legitimately appeals to constitutional rights, I would consider
that the person who owned the phone broke his social contract by murdering
innocent people and thus deserved some suspension of rights, at least
temporarily. By "social contract", I mean the assumed agreement that we (you, me, everyone) won't try to intentionally harm one another if the other will do the same... you know, the thing that allows society to exist in the first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment