Apple vs. FBI Case Study PDF

Preview

Summary

In the wake of the December 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, attention turned to the perpetrator’s iPhone...

Description

DACUMOS, Jane Elaine E. BSIT 2 – 1

Apple vs. FBI Case Study In the wake of the December 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, attention turned to the perpetrator’s iPhone. A federal judge asked Apple, maker of the iPhone, to provide “reasonable technical assistance” to the FBI in accessing the information on the phone with that hope of discovering additional threats to national security. Apple provided the FBI with data it had in their possession and sent Apple engineers to advise the FBI, but refused to comply with the court order to bypass the phone’s security measures: specifically, the 4-digit login code and a feature that erases all data after ten incorrect attempts. The FBI argued that the bypass could only be used for this phone, this one time. The agency also cited national security concerns, given the phone may lead to better understanding the attack and preventing further incidents. Apple CEO Tim Cook issued a public letter reiterating Apple’s refusal to cooperate. Cook advocated for the benefits of encryption in society to keep personal information safe. He stated that creating the backdoor entry into the iPhone would be akin to creating a master key capable of accessing the tens of millions of iPhones in the U.S. alone. Cook

Social and Professional Issues

also had concerns that the FBI was outstepping its bounds - by using the court system to expand its authority - and believed the case should be settled after public debate and legislative action through Congress instead. Public opinion polls on the issue were split. A number of major tech firms filed amicus briefs in support of Apple. The White House and Bill Gates stood behind the FBI. In anticlimactic fashion, the FBI withdrew its request a day before the hearing, claiming it no longer needed Apple’s help to assess the phone. It is speculated that an Israeli tech firm, Cellebrite, helped the FBI gain assess. Questions: 1. Was Apple wrong for not complying with the FBI’s request? If so, why? If not, why not? The Apple Company’s decision to not comply with what the FBI is asking from them is a good choice to prevent the future result of their request. For instance, if the company did what they are asking from them, there would be a possibility that the procedure of encrypting a device under them in cases like these, other leaders will also appeal to make this thing possible in their country. On the other hand, since we all know the

DACUMOS, Jane Elaine E. BSIT 2 – 1

security that the company has with its phones or gadgets, they should have just taken possession of the said phone from the suspect and bypassed it in order to gain access from it and to get information that could help in solving the crime with methods that are not shown and undisclosed to the FBI. With this, not only that the company has helped the government to find a better understanding and solutions to the case, but also they have shown and proven that the security they are offering is something that not just anyone can easily access. 2. What ethical issues are involved in this case? Please consult our Framework for Ethical Decision Making for an overview of modes of moral reasoning. Ethical issues challenged by this crime or case includes privacy and cyber-crime. The moment the suspect purchased his phone from the Apple company, both the rights and ownership are already moved to his hands. With this, the information and data stored on his phone are private and are protected by passwords and code encryptions. Therefore, when this information is being accessed through the use of private software, then the

Social and Professional Issues

privacy of the owner is being violated. Additionally, when the Apple company rejected the request of the FBI to create software to crack the suspect’s phone, the FBI immediately searched for a third-party who could make it happen thus making the action itself considered a cyber-crime. 3. Who are the stakeholders in this situation? In this case study, it is really important to consider and note the stakeholders. First and foremost, the most important stakeholders of this issue are the iPhone users who are at risk of their security and privacy are being compromised since most of their personal information is stored in their devices. Other stakeholders are other terrorist organizations and the people from the said country and where the crime has taken place, as the information gathered from the suspect’s device could prevent future attacks. Furthermore, Apple and the FBI are also the major stakeholders in this crime since Apple company refused to comply with the FBI that lead this agency to find the passcode into the suspect’s device gaining information that is valuable about the crime.

DACUMOS, Jane Elaine E. BSIT 2 – 1

4. Apple’s values are listed on the bottom of its home page at apple.com. Is the company’s decision consistent with its values? Is that important? In relation to this case, Apple is an example of one company that places an emphasis on privacy. With the company’s core values, it is true that they are consistent with it when they are doing a decision. It is important to be consistent in doing the values that you have set as this impacts how you interact with customers where consumer data resides and how digital identities are stored and encrypted. With this, every company in the industry, not only Apple, should always put their customers in a secure and private user experience.

Social and Professional Issues...