The FBI Isn't Happy that Apple Is Protecting Your Privacy

It seems absurd that we’d have to start here, but let’s be clear: Apple isn’t on the side of terrorists. You wouldn’t know that the way the Department of Justice tells the story, with federal law enforcement loudly criticizing the company’s position on encryption and protecting your data.

The latest attack came earlier this week with Attorney General William Barr’s statements at a press conference where the FBI revealed it had been able to hack into the iPhone used by the shooter who killed three U.S. sailors, and injured eight others, at the Pensacola Naval Air Station last year.

Credit: SHUTTERSTOCK

“Apple’s desire to provide privacy for its customers is understandable, but not at all costs,” said Barr at the press conference. “There is no reason why companies like Apple cannot design their consumer products and apps to allow for court-authorized access by law enforcement, while maintaining very high standards of data security. Striking this balance should not be left to corporate board rooms.”

The most dangerous part of this argument is that it sounds reasonable. Who isn’t on the side of preventing bad guys from doing bad things? Who wouldn’t want the government to be able to investigate crimes, especially acts of terrorism?

Except, once you open that door—or iPhone—it’s open.

Apple’s position has long been that privacy matters, and protecting your data with encryption is an important aspect of that value. There is no such thing as encryption that has some type of special secret access for the government whenever it thinks it needs to crack an iPhone. Either it’s encrypted or it isn’t. Apple believes that encryption is important enough that it’s willing to stand up to the government.

And it should.

This isn’t the first time, either. It made a point in 2016 of refusing to unlock another iPhone, this one belonging to one of the attackers in the San Bernardino mass shooting. The government was eventually able to access that phone using a third-party tool that is able to guess a passcode while bypassing some of the device’s security features. Apple, however, didn’t budge.

Regardless of the protests by the country’s top law enforcement officials, that’s exactly how it should be. Apple has made protecting your privacy its core brand value, and it stands behind that with its actions. No matter how much pressure, no matter how much criticism, we’re all in big trouble if Apple ever gives up that principle.

That’s because encryption protects your personal data, your business data, your photos, your conversations, your text messages, your financial records, and your health information. It makes it so that hackers with bad intentions aren’t able to access take advantage of that personal information. In order for that to be the case, it means the feds can’t have a backdoor.

The FBI and DOJ aren't the only government agencies, by the way, that take a different stance on user privacy than Apple. I wrote this week for Inc.com about how states have decided to bypass the contact tracing technology developed by Apple and Google, and are instead designing their own apps which collect and track far more information.

While those decisions have nothing to do with criminal investigations, there is a similar thread, which is that government agencies don't particularly like that Apple is protecting your privacy even when agencies want your information. And, before you think this doesn't really matter because it doesn't directly affect you, let me remind you that there has never been a more important time to get this right.

Keeping your personal information private, whether it's banking records, or your company's customer data, or just personal photos of your kids, matters. So does keeping your health or location information private--which is suddenly extremely relevant. 

There has never been a more important time to remind ourselves that whatever access the government has to the iPhone belonging to a terrorist, it will have for everyone. And, even more importantly, whatever access the government has to a backdoor can also be exploited by people with far worse intentions. That, ultimately, is why it matters.