Bill Gates sided with the FBI and the judge who asked Apple tools to unlock the iPhone 5C Farook Rizawan, the murderess who carried out the massacre of San Bernardino. The Microsoft founder is then a lone voice, given that virtually all the world of technology makes the case of Apple.
The point in question, according to Gates, is that investigators are asking a very specific tool for unlock only that single device. Apple should therefore meet the demand. One aspect that we explained a few days ago, on which Apple has made strong objections.
As Gates thinks even the FBI Director , but its part is not a surprise. James Comey, this is his name, said that the agency does not aim to violate Apple’s encryption but only access the information on the iPhone at the heart of the matter. The backdoor theory for all seasons, according to Comey, would be false.
If Apple were to lose, however, it can be assumed that the investigative agency would use this victory as a tool to handle similar situations in the future.
The voices contend that, from that of AD Apple Tim Cook, argue that if Apple were to meet it would first of all to create a dangerous legal precedent (more), and in the future Apple can not prevent other requests convincingly.
It is also believed that if Washington were to get this “privilege” from Apple, then they would other governments of world. A hypothesis also supported by an Apple executive in a recent interview. The idea that China, Iran, North Korea and other “bad” countries have that kind of access to the devices is not particularly inviting. In addition there is always the risk that a specific software anyone can create one general.
In many then they are convinced that the FBI could do it without the help of Apple, and this reinforces the idea of a political maneuver rather than investigative.
The major industries of the technological world are practically all agreed with Apple. In recent days there have been no official statements from the AD Google Sundar Pichai, Facebook , Jack Dorsey Twitter , and others. They and other 150 companies, last May, have supported a petition calling for Barack Obama to give legal support to the end-to-end encryption.
And in the last hour will be added to Mark Zuckerberg , declared itself “comprehensive” in relation to Tim Cook. On the other hand Apple and Facebook are in the same boat, as well as many other companies. All watching with fear the possibility that the insertion of backdoor becomes mandatory.
There are many things that can be scary: blanket surveillance on everything and everyone, the transformation of Western democracies in police states, persecution of dissidents and much more. Fears are not unfounded but are not even certainties, and which are also shared by Michael Hayden. Namely the ‘ former director of the NSA and the CIA , one in the center of the scandal on the global surveillance.
Hayden said he was in favor of the FBI in the issue with Apple, but adds that “in general are contrary to the effort of the government, in the person of FBI director Jim Comey”. Hayden moves away from specific discussion on requests made to Apple, and prefers to cite Comey as an example of a larger issue, namely that of the governmental backdoor :
“Jim wants a back door available to the US authorities in each device, generally. And, frankly, I think that this adversely affects the safety and security of Americans even though it might make the work of Jim a little ‘easier in specific circumstances “.
The problem, of course, is that if there is a back door there is no way to avoid that Also use the “unauthorized persons” , from terrorists to the governments of non-allied countries, up to criminals seeking from the personal to steal.
These arguments, however, are not easy to understand, nor are especially known to the general public. In fact, a recent survey reveals that 51% of US citizens are from the FBI – so the two positions are in balance. But if we look at the same poll suggested to readers of Tom’s Hardware , we see that the majority of people are on the side of Apple – so I agree with the major hi-tech companies.
Comparison appear to be significant, even considering the numerical differences, because we have to assume that Tom’s Hardware readers are more informed on the issues of personal privacy and technology and know at least roughly what a back door.
We can conclude, or at least assumed, that an informed person (not necessarily an expert) of these technological aspects, tend to promote solutions that protect information security Personal and communications. It seems, in essence, that geeks and nerds of the world are ready to marry the famous phrase of Benjamin Franklin:
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety crumbs, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
A position that does not see all agree, or between citizens or between the rulers and even among the editors of Tom’s Hardware. Discussions on the encryption of these months, from this point of view, are the same on the stressful security checks at airports. They make it really safer, or serve only to give someone the illusion of security? It is an important debate, according to you?
No comments:
Post a Comment