Today, the Department of Justice was set to pursue its case to force Apple to weaken the security protections on the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino attackers. But, hours before the scheduled hearing, the Department of Justice asked the court to vacate the hearing, saying it had found an outside method to unlock the phone. In response, Morgan Reed, executive director of ACT | The App Association, released the following statement:
When the Justice Department brought this case forward, they thought the public would support their efforts to undermine the security upon which online communication relies. But after sparring with Apple in the courts for three weeks, they have now turned attention to using their own resources to make gains in their investigation.
We are hopeful the FBI has found a way to get the information they need to pursue suspects in the San Bernardino case. But for the tech community, the FBI’s incredibly broad and intrusive requests show why the courtroom is not the right place for this matter. If the government requires app makers and software companies to weaken security, it opens the door for hackers and theives to steal sensitive personal information.
Global digital trade depends on data protections like encryption to keep users safe from identity theft and other harms. The FBI’s poorly considered efforts to erode security protections have now fallen short. As a community, app makers are fortunate that Apple stood up for data security. But, we’re now left to wonder what happens the next time the DOJ tries to force a company to compromise the security of millions of users. And what if it’s a small company with fewer resources that must choose between standing up or shutting down?
These questions make clear that it’s time for a thoughtful discussion about how tech companies can continue to provide the best security for consumers’ most private information.
Image: Victoria Pickering / license / no changes made