A court order demanding that Apple Inc. help the U.S. government break into the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino, Calif., shooters reignites a long-simmering debate between technology companies insistent on protecting digital privacy and law enforcement agencies concerned about being unable to recover evidence or eavesdrop on the communications of terrorists or other criminals. The White House disputed the contention by Apple's chief executive officer, Tim Cook, that the court order threatened the security of its customers and had 'implications far beyond the legal case at hand.'
They are not asking Apple to redesign its product or to create a new backdoor to one of their products. They're simply asking for something that would have an impact on this one device.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest
The government argues that the phone is a crucial piece of evidence in investigating one of the worst terrorist attacks in the U.S. But privacy groups warn that forcing companies to crack their own encryption threatens not just the privacy of customers but potentially the citizens of any country. If the federal judge rejects Apple's arguments, the company can appeal the order up the chain, ultimately to the Supreme Court.
The problem is that the technique that Apple introduces could be used again by the FBI. And if it gets out, by China or Russia or others ... It introduces exposures that haven’t been there in the past. It’s a backdoor.
David Kennedy, a forensics expert who is chief executive of cyberfirm TrustedSec
