I wrote a Tweety thing about Apple and the FBI.
Here’s the thing about Apple vs. the FBI: this isn’t nearly as unique or important an issue as some would have you believe.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Most major corporate interests, Apple included, regularly cooperate with law enforcement to provide info on their users.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Some do so only in response to subpoena, and some cooperate voluntarily, but all eventually comply. Why? Because the law says they have to.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Facebook records and the like are regularly used by law enforcement to prosecute criminal offenders.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
What the FBI is asking Apple to do really isn’t that different. They’re asking for access to information based on a lawful court order.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Yes, Apple is claiming that they “don’t have” what the FBI is looking for—i.e., that they can’t crack the San Bernardino iPhone.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
They’re saying they’d have to create something new just to get into the phone.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
They’re not saying they *can’t* do it, only that they don’t want to.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
The credulity of this statement aside (I don’t buy for a second that they couldn’t do this in moments), the whole argument is a straw man.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
This isn’t some issue of first impression. The security at issue could just as easily be a physical lock and key.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Apple might as well be saying, “Well, we have that info, but it’s in a locked filing cabinet and we don’t have a key to it."
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
And user security blah blah dangerous precedent blah. But LE has been gaining records in this way since the Constitution was written.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
You don’t get a pass from a subpoena by saying you’d have to have a key made.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Is this a very public demonstration of how vulnerable our online data is? Absolutely.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
But the answer isn’t to trust Apple to protect our data and create a standoff between government and private entities.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
The answer is for users to be more aware of how secure their own data is. The answer is to understand that Apple is not a public utility.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
If you want your data protected, don’t put it on the Internet. Keep it local, keep it encrypted, and keep it under your own control.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Even then, our privacy has limitations. One of them is when the info in question is evidence in a criminal case.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
The only “new” thing here is the fact that you’ve got a major corp. arguing publicly that the laws of the US shouldn’t apply to it.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
Remember: Apple is not your friend. Apple is an enormous, multinational corporation. They care about profit first and foremost.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016
If security is your first concern, you should be just as concerned with Apple having your data as you are with the FBI having it.
— Jim Cormier (@jcormier) February 22, 2016