Apple has been duking it out with the government in court over the matter of unlocking encrypted user data on its mobile devices, particularly the iPhone, the company maintains that decrypting an iPhone in one case will set a precedent that will cause more problems for the company down the line. The Department of Justice has no patience for Apple’s stance that even if it could decrypt the device it wouldn’t feel comfortable to do so because that would amount to breaking the trust its customers have placed in it. The DOJ believes Apple should be forced to unlock encrypted user data if the government asks it to.
This particular case involves an iPhone belonging to a suspect who has been indicted for possession of methamphetamine. The government needs to have that iPhone unlocked but the search warrant is not being executed. Apple says that it’s impossible for it to access data on an iOS device locked with a passcode that’s running iOS 8 or later, adding that even if it could it wouldn’t want to because that would harm the trust customers have placed in it.
The Department of Justice argues that Apple’s position doesn’t stand and that it should be required to unlock such data because iOS is “licensed, not sold” to customers. It pointed out to U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein that Apple has written and owns the software that runs the phone, and it’s that software which is thwarting the execution of the search warrant.
Apple talks about the burden setting such a precedence would put on it, the company would have to divert equipment, employees, software and resources towards complying with such government requests to unlock encrypted user data. The DoJ says that Apple makes to attempt to quantify the burden that it speaks about and it doesn’t offer any evidence to support its position.
The case is far from over right now and from the looks of it Apple doesn’t appear to be willing to accept what the government is asking. If it does, many of its customers will feel that the company has broken their trust and its promises of providing privacy and data security.
What do you think Apple should do in this case? Agree to the execution of the search warrant, provided that it has the capability to do so, or stick to its guns no matter what the outcome? Let us know by leaving a comment below.