Apple CEO Stands Strong Against FEDs on Encryption

encryption3Last Sunday, Apple CEO Tim Cook took part in an interview on the CBS new programĀ 60 MinutesĀ in which he asserted the rights of tech companies to provide encryption services to their clients.

“There’s all kinds of sensitive information on smartphones today,” claimed Cook. “You should have the ability to protect it. The only way we know how to do that is to encrypt it.”

Cook noted that Apple was still willing to comply with search warrants served on it by law enforcement officials.

FBI Director James B. Comey disagrees, believing encryption is only remains a legal service because of a lag between legislators and inventors: “Unfortunately, the law hasn’t kept pace with technology, and this disconnect has created a significant public safety problem… We call it ‘Going Dark’ and what it means is this: Those charged with protecting our people aren’t always able to access the evidence we need to prosecute crime and prevent terrorism, even with lawful authority.”

“We have the legal authority to intercept and access communications and informant pursuant to court order, but we often lack the technical ability to do so,” added Comey.

Plenty of security and tech advocates take issue with Comey’s initiative to ban encryption services.

“A proposal to protect our security by weakening our security is going in the wrong direction,” asserted executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation Cindy Cohn.

“If the government were to suggest that no one put locks on their doors because if we were a terrorist it would be harder to get into our house, we would think that was a bad idea… This is pretty much the digital equivalent of that.”

supercompute2Cohn makes an excellent point; as large scale hacks become commonplace, government agencies are finding that sometimes not even they can keep their sensitive data under wraps. If they have access to everyone’s data, or make that data more accessible to everyone, terrorists won’t be the only users made more vulnerable.

Berin Szoka, the president of TechFreedom, claims that this issue presents a historic crossroads in American history and the history of the internet:

“This is really a binary issue. Are you going to allow end-to-end encryption by the operating system makers or not? Once you say no, you start down this road without stopping the really smart bad guys from continuing to use encryption on their devices.”

CEO of Accellion Yorgen Edholm believes the government can achieve its goals by walking a separate path: “If the government law enforcement agencies are looking for an encryption compromise, maybe they should look outside the tech sector for it… Encryption can always be broken by people who have supercomputers- the government has more supercomputers than anyone else. So the government has the resources to decrypt anything. It’s just that those resources have to be made available to local law enforcement… That compromise wouldn’t make it easier for the bad guys to get into my privacy just because the government wants to have the computer equivalent of a wiretap.”

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *