Apple refused government request for "making backdoor that can avoid iPhone's encryption"

ByErickson Alves

At December 2015 in San Bernardino, California, USA, a criminal armed with welfare facilities for disabled people attacked. This case is "San Bernardino gun shooting incidentAlthough it will become known as 'Known as', Apple and the Federal Court continue to intensely interrogate "iPhone" used by the criminal of the case.

Tim Cook: Apple will fight US demands to build an iPhone backdoor | The Verge
http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/17/11031364/apple-encryption-san-bernardino-response

The point that is not showing the attitude that Apple responds to unlocking iPhone seized in the investigation of San Bernardino gun shooting incident. After the incident, iPhone which seemed to belong to the criminal was seized by the investigation authority, but this terminal was locked, which could not be unlocked even by FBI, so you can not access the communication contents of the criminal group The condition was continued.

So, FBI was asking iPhone's manufacturer "Apple" to unlock "Apple", but Apple declined as "unlawful release is a violation of the privacy of the user" I refused the request. So the FBI urges the Federal Court to issue an unlocked court order to Apple. And since the beginning of February 2016 the criminal against the Apple from the courtIPhone unlock commandWill be issued.

U.S. federal court unlocking criminal's iPhone to Apple against San Bernardino gun shooting incident - BusinessNewsline


In response, Apple's Tim Cook CEO released an open letter entitled "Messages to Customers" on its website, in a form that allows all Internet users to view Apple's opinion on court orders It is open to the public.

Customer Letter - Apple
http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/


In the message, the Apple side officially opposed the order from the court side, "FBI essentially speaks to Apple" to make backdoor to avoid iPhone encryption " It's like saying that this is what Apple has refused for so long, "Cook says. According to the court's order, "Beyond the lawsuit case in front of you, you will have a big meaning", if you do, the US government will "have a master who can easily access millions of devices It is such a thing as getting a key "and points out that it is a dangerous act. Furthermore, "The government is like offering Apple to hack our customers, which is an act of disguising the security advance we have built over decades," the government's request I am criticizing.

Also, over the past few years, cryptographic researchers and national security experts have pointed to the importance of encryption, criticizing efforts to weaken encryption, "data protection like Apple We will hurt the citizens who rely on companies tackling them. " In addition, Apple has also revealed that FBI has asked to develop "OS for iPhone of a new version (OS that government can access data in terminal)" in the past.

In addition, when iOS 8 was released, Apple ceased storing the encryption key of each terminal at home. As a result, the encryption key for unlocking the terminal is saved only in each terminal, and as a result, we succeeded in reducing the possibility of a third party accessing user data. However, with this, Apple can not respond to unlocking of iPhone when it is like this case, and when receiving a request for "unlocking iPhone" from the court in the past,Apple can not unlock iPhone "I am doing the same reply.

Apple's decision is an important event in the fight against technology companies and government "user data". This is because Microsoft and Google have revealed that it is a policy to weaken the encryption of data so that Apple has clearly opposed the pressures from those governments. In addition, Mr. Cook said at the end of the open letter "We believe the intention of the FBI is wonderful, but believe that it is wrong for the government to ask us to provide backdoor for products I am writing it. "