Apple frequently finds itself in the midst of debates and controversies with the FBI over privacy issues, a stormy relationship that dates back to the San Bernardino case.
What’s Going On with Law Enforcement?
This time, the controversy was sparked by Donald Trump – the former president and now candidate – during a rally this Wednesday in North Carolina. He argues that Apple should be responsible for assisting law enforcement and should bypass privacy protections. The focus of his concern: himself!
Indeed, he called on the FBI to put pressure on Cupertino to unlock iPhones belonging to individuals who attempted to assassinate him. They need to get Apple to open third-party apps, and they need to get Apple to unlock the six phones of this second madman,
he said, referring to two recent attacks he suffered and the many smartphones seized from the perpetrators.
Confusing Accusations
As the White House hopeful stated, the FBI could not access ‘three potentially foreign applications’ on the phone of Thomas Matthew Crooks, the man from Pennsylvania who shot and hit Trump’s ear during a rally in July. He also mentioned that Ryan Wesley Routh, who was apprehended after a shootout with U.S. Secret Service agents at Trump’s golf club in Florida, had six mobile phones that the FBI ‘also could not unlock’
.
However, several details in these accounts seem inconsistent, particularly the fact that one of the perpetrators owned a Samsung smartphone. True to form, Donald tends to present things in a way that suits him – between photo edits and spreading misinformation – It’s entirely possible he overlooked this technical detail (after all, Apple can do everything, even unlock Androids…).
Apple’s Stance on iPhone Unlocking
Apple’s stance has been consistent over the years. The company has always rejected the creation of back doors, seeing it as a significant weakening of system security and a compromise of its principles. Indeed, Apple has consistently upheld privacy protection as a cornerstone and has consistently refused to cooperate.
In 2016, when a U.S. federal judge ordered Apple to collaborate with the FBI to unlock the iPhone of one of the shooters in San Bernardino, California, Apple opposed the order, noting that it would set a dangerous precedent with security risks. The FBI eventually used other means and managed to unlock the iPhone (which revealed nothing).
The situation repeated itself with the Pensacola shooting in Florida at the end of 2019. The FBI asked Apple to help unlock iPhones belonging to the suspected perpetrator – which it again refused.
Hi, my name is Disha and I’m a passionate writer and editor at “Jason Deegan”. With a keen interest in all things tech, I strive to bring you the latest news and updates from the world of high-tech.