Jacqueline’s post touched upon the fiasco between Apple and the FBI which happened after the San Bernardino shootings where the FBI asked Apple to develop a software in order for the FBI to unlock the shooter’s iPhone – which Apple refused but the FBI managed to unlock the phone in the end.
Through reading her post, I do agree with her view that Apple did the right thing by sticking to their policy and protecting the privacy of their customers, however I don’t quite agree with her suggestion of a rule for the company to only unlock a specific phone to avoid allowing the FBI access to people’s phones. This is because I think that once a software is developed to unlock a phone, it will always be there. The company can claim that the software would only work on one certain device however if the algorithm was already developed, it will inevitably be misused, perhaps hackers might gain access or even employees within the company might leak the software or “sell” it to a different source. If this occurs, Apple’s customers’ safety would be highly compromised and it could bring about a large amount of bad publicity.
I did some further research on this issue and came across the Scientific American’s blogpost. The post briefly outlines the issue at hand and also talks about the increasing uncertainty and threats of the protection of our privacy through social media or most big tech companies.
In the post, it was also mentioned that companies such as WhatsApp and Google are “doubling down” on their data encryption. However, even with all the so-called advanced data encryption promised, I am still skeptical and I take the Snowden view that the government has the ability to access all the personal information that is put online.
I strongly agree with the closing statement that, “tech companies and law enforcement should be focusing more on new models of data protection and access that build rather than erode trust in the system”. I think that if the tech companies collaborated with law enforcement to develop these new models of data protection, they must provide complete transparency in order for consumers to feel comfortable and safe with the privacy protection. Perhaps they could do this by outlining how the data protection software was formulated and provide complete disclosure if the law enforcement is allowed to access certain information in the consumers’ phones.
All in all, I think that both posts I’ve mentioned were interesting and insightful to read.
Word Count: 419
Sources:
Skilton, Mark. “What the Apple versus FBI Debacle Taught Us.” Scientific American. 20 May. 2016 <https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/what-the-apple-versus-fbi-debacle-taught-us/>
Image: