Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ysv2 3766 days ago
It seems the Justice Department admits that Apple's reputation for privacy and security is of great value to the company. I wonder how it intends to argue, then, that forcing Apple to create a corrupted build of iOS which harms that security and that hard-won reputation does not place an "undue burden" on the company.
4 comments
rhino369 3766 days ago
>https://s3.amazonaws.com/pacer-documents/25/640469/031122954...

They basically argue that Apple is incorrect about security implications and that marketing concerns don't cause undue burden. They also argue that Apple isn't above the law and just because Apple marketed themselves that way doesn't make a burden.

link
fnordfnordfnord 3766 days ago
Yeah, it's kind of like an admission that at least some of the public value privacy.
link
hodgesrm 3766 days ago
Clearly Apple's security has market value but that needs to be balanced against the benefits to society as a whole. Just restricting this to US law it seems Apple is not defending an existing right to privacy of the "man's home is his castle" sort. Those have been limited from the beginning by warrants and other acknowledged mechanisms of government to poke its nose into people's private affairs in the interest of the general welfare. The "right" that Apple is defending seems new and much more absolute--that you may possess devices may not be opened under any circumstances whatsoever.

The question of whether such rights exist is separate from the question of whether breaking into one device threatens security of all others. If true that seems to call into question the assumptions on which data protection algorithms are based. In other words, assuming you can create truly unbreakable encryption and it only works if there are no backdoors, is that really a data protection strategy that meets the needs of society as a whole? You could argue it's flawed even if the mathematics work perfectly.

link
jasonjei 3766 days ago
What of Yahoo when they allowed Chinese authorities to access an email account? While we might believe in the integrity of the US government, my faith in a backdoor being made available to the Chinese government used responsibly is low.
link
hodgesrm 3766 days ago
Opening up accounts as Yahoo did seems like a condition of doing business in that market. It seems unrealistic to expect that Apple will be able to maintain their position against the Chinese government for very long. They will either have to conform or leave the market as Google did. I don't follow how Apple can really win that one if the Chinese government chooses to push the issue.

p.s., I'm not defending the Chinese position in any way. If it were my company I would leave the market.

p.p.s., For anyone down-voting it would be helpful to state your argument for doing so. The Apple case is not as clear cut as some of the learned commentary on HN would have it.

link
ApplaudPumice 3766 days ago
> While we might believe in the integrity of the US government

It seems here that nobody here is concerned about non USA citizens.

link
LeoNatan25 3766 days ago
Even USA citizens should not believe in the integrity of the US government, considering the surveillance antics it has taken on its own citizens.
link
gopalv 3766 days ago
> It seems the Justice Department admits that Apple's reputation for privacy and security is of great value to the company.

in China.

Can you imagine what a reputation for standing upto governments (in a democracy, but with most of your employees as taxpayers) will look like?

link