Apple v. The FBI- Sanjay Rajput
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Roosevelt University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
388
Subject
Information Systems
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by DukeSalamanderPerson372
APPLE V. THE FBI
1.
What prompted the confrontation between Apple and the FBI?
The conflict or confrontation between Apple and the FBI originated from the aftermath of the 2015 San
Bernardino shooting, where the shooters utilized an iPhone. The FBI sought access to the device's data,
but Apple's security measures prevented such access. In the U.S., obtaining user data for criminal
investigations requires a specific court warrant tailored to the targeted data or device and issued by a
judge. Apple secured iPhone data through encryption and mandated user passcodes or biometric
authentication for access.
Tim Cook was faced with a dilemma: comply with the FBI's request for an iPhone encryption backdoor or
decline, potentially leading to a legal dispute. Cook opted to reject the FBI's request, citing concerns that
creating a backdoor might jeopardize the security of all iPhones, not just the specific one in question in
this case. He emphasized Apple's prioritization of customer privacy and highlighted the company's
refusal to compromise user security, despite understanding and sympathizing with the FBI's needs. Cook
assured that Apple remained dedicated to protecting user privacy and data integrity.
2.
What is the legal process for the U.S. government to access user data as part of criminal
investigations?
The U.S. federal government must lawfully obtain a warrant from a judge or legal authority to access
user data during criminal investigations. This warrant must specifically address the relevant data or
device and be issued by a judge. At that time, Apple safeguarded iPhone information through encrypted
user data and required passcodes or biometric authentication for device access. In this case FBI got the
warrant from the court, but Apple challenged the court order arguing that complying with the order
would set dangerous precedent by creating a backdoor that could compromise the security and privacy
of all iPhone users.
3.
At the time of the case, how did Apple secure data on iPhones?
Apple used to secure data on iPhones primarily through encryption and security features embedded in
the devices like passcode or use of biometric authentication in order to access the device.
The encryption made it extremely difficult for unauthorized access to the iPhones content without the
owner’s passcode or biometric authentication (Touch ID or Face ID)
The iPhone involved in this case was protected by these security measures, making it challenging for FBI
to access its data without passcode. FBI requested to create a tool that would bypass these security
features to which Apple opposed by saying it may jeopardize the security and privacy of all iPhones.
4.
What are Tim Cook’s options? How should he respond?
Tim Cook as the CEO of Apple had quite a few options and considerations regarding how to respond to
the FBI’s request to assistance in accessing the iPhone data.
1)
He had a choice to comply with the FBI’s request and allow FBI’s request for a backdoor
to the iPhone encryption. However, this choice would raise concerns about setting
precedent that could compromise user privacy and device security for all the iPhone
users.
2)
He could take legal route and challenge the court order and be ready for long legal battle
and argue that backdoor option would post significant risk to user privacy and security
and let court know the broader implications for user privacy and potential misuse of
such option.
3)
He could take public opinion by highlighting the potential risks of creating backdoor
entry for FBI access. I think this step would provide awareness to the public as well on
the importance of data privacy and protecting user data.
4)
He is CEO of such a big tech company, I think he should have assisted FBI and should
have try to help FBI to find alternative means of extracting data. I am sure his company
has 100’s of data scientist and engineers to figure out the solution.
Tim Cook should find out the way and help FBI with it’s request by ensuring that they give backdoor
entry to the only iPhone used by shooter in this case and not give access all the iPhones. But if that is not
possible then Mr. Cook should clarify that they cannot compromise with user privacy and data of all the
iPhone users. If government still insist, then he should let court know that government is asking Apple to
hack user data and this approach as a dangerous precedent. He should tell court that rather than asking
for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All-Writs Act of
1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help