Apple Holds the Key to Safeguarding Against Terror

Another fanatic, blinded by a cult–like ideology, is inflicting more pain on innocent bystanders in San Bernardino, Calif. The only difference is this time the fanatic worships Edward Snowden and not Allah. Apple CEO Tim Cook is refusing to obey a federal court order requiring his company to assist the FBI in recovering data from the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone 5c. The judge ruled Apple must devise a way to defeat the phone’s password security feature; otherwise all information will be deleted after 10 incorrect password attempts.

Cook chooses to characterize the court order as an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Cook contends, “Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.” But privacy is not the issue here. This isn’t a fishing expedition like Lois Lerner’s IRS conducted on various pro–life groups, where the government demanded to know the content of their prayers. (Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall Tim Cook or the ACLU taking a stand on this genuine invasion of privacy.) San Bernardino County owns the iPhone in question and it wants the data retrieved. Cook’s privacy fixation means he is no more able to evaluate the difference between a single court–order and mass NSA data sweeps; than the average Syrian “refugee” is able to tell the difference in meaning between female dress today and the 7th century. No one’s privacy; least of all the dead jihadi’s is being violated.

---

The FBI is requesting a data rescue operation. Cook’s refusal to assist is analogous to an atheist surfer refusing to help rescue a drowning woman, because her bobbing up and down in the water reminds him of a baptism. The various photos I’ve seen of Cook have never left me with the impression that he has much of a sense of irony and the letter proves it. He cloaks misguided obstinacy thusly: “Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk.” Tell that to the relatives of the 14 dead in San Bernardino who are less than enchanted with Cook’s hardline against helping. Right now the terror twosome’s co–conspirators know who they are and they are no doubt taking rapid steps to cover their tracks, but somehow Tim Cook thinks it’s important to the future of liberty in America that law enforcement remain ignorant until the next attack. Particularly if the jihadis are using an Android phone. Once Cook dispenses with the privacy posturing, he gets into a worst–case scenario of the damage the software could conceivably do if unleashed on an unsuspecting public: “In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession . . . Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices.” Something any locksmith could say about a safe deposit master key, but Cook expects to get away with this empty argument because Millennials have never seen a safe deposit box. Cook also fears if he obeys the law in this instance Apple with become the software subsidiary for the feds. “The government could . . . demand Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.” The next thing you know Cook will be claiming Obama can force you to buy health insurance. One second thought Cook has a point here; one can never be too suspicious of the Obama InJustice Department. The simple solution is, don’t give the FBI the software. Instead, for chain of custody purposes, have FBI tech personnel in the room when the security bypass software is run on the phone. Once security features are defeated, the FBI removes the data, and Apple keeps the key. Even better, let Cook personally keep the software in his possession. Each time the feds get a new court order he can personally unlock the phone and then return the master key to the sanctum sanctorum. Problem solved. Cook boasts, “At Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding data.” But the fact is if Apple can’t protect the security solvent software, it can’t protect your private data either. Cook’s foot–dragging and proclaiming he’s more private than thou may be making him a hero among Rand Paul voters, but to the rest of the public worrying when and where the next can o’jihad is going to be opened, Cook just looks self–centered.