There is currently a court case in San Bernardino where the FBI is attempting to compel Apple to build an update to IOS that would allow them to access encrypted data on the work phone of Syed Rizwan Farook (Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik were responsible, authorities say, for killing 14 people and injuring another 22 who were attending a training event and holiday party last December 2 ).
The FBI has requested and has been granted by Magistrate Sheri Pym, in the US District Court of Central California, a court order to force Apple to provide the FBI with software to defeat a self-destruct mechanism on the iPhone. Under the pretense that the phone belongs to the county and the county has the right to access any and all information on their device. To this Tim Cook (CEO of Apple) responded with an open letter to their customers saying they will not comply with the court order. Apple is not disobeying the court order because it supports murdering terrorists, but because they value the rights of their users and are not going to deliberately circumvent their security.
In a statements to Fox News one of the against working the San Bernardino case as stated “Nobody can build a phone that we cannot get in under unique circumstances. Why should Apple be allowed to build a phone that does that?” and “The right should not supersede our ability to keep people safe. It’s why we are not finding others, encryption, and, specifically in this case, we cannot connect the dots.” source. Here is where the DOJ, the FBI and the Judge is wrong and Apple is right. “Our Rights” to not self-incriminate do supersede, and are guaranteed by the constitution. To make this a little more clear the court order is basically the same as getting a court order to force MasterLock to update all of their padlocks to use a master key so the government can open them if they need to.
Regardless of who owns what is being locked, by forcing a company to add security vulnerabilities to their products is wrong, reckless, and fundamentally against everything our country was founded on. I understand the DOJ’s position but they are wrong.
Why San Bernardino is at fault, if you are going to issue devices as a company/government entity (this was a work phone) you should be managing your hardware to protect your assets, this is the basic bus factor. If an employee has a company device, the company owns it, and everything on it. Outside of this case what happens if an employee has valuable company information on a device and the person is in a car wreak? Digital assets, like all assets, need to be managed correctly, the device manufacture should not be forced to weaken their product for your bad planning.