It is evident that you need to know what exactly is Apple’s Battle with the FBI: Privacy vs. National Security. In this brief article, we will briefly go over the facts that are involved in this debate.
The Case Study Solution is a two-part program. Part one of the program will focus on the Constitutionality of the back door search technique used by the FBI in the San Bernardino terrorist attack. While the second part of the Case Study Solution will show how Apple could best protect your data.
The Back Door Search Technique in the San Bernardino Terrorist Attack: According to a recent court filing in the San Bernardino Case, the FBI is using a third party application that allows for remote access to the phone. This back door application is not supposed to be accessible by Apple.
In order to work around the privacy measures built into the iPhone, the San Bernardino Case Study Solution program will show you how to install a third party application. This will allow for the FBI to access the content of the phone remotely.
The Case Study Solution in Understanding the Privacy vs National Security Differences. As you will learn in this program, there are major differences between how the FBI protects a suspect’s digital data and how Apple does. Let’s look at a few of the key differences.
A Phone that Never Loses it’s Privacy: The iPhone’s user-friendly design makes it easy to lock a password on the phone. This makes it easy to “destroy” the data on the phone. Any change in a government database would have to be entered by the iPhone owner, which greatly reduces the ability of the government to access data. This way, the FBI cannot steal it without the owner knowing about it.
Encryption is Secure: Encryption is very important to users of digital information. As I stated earlier, you cannot destroy data. Furthermore, the encryption works over a secure channel such as the internet. A hacker can view what you are doing, but not copy it. Not only does the encryption work over an internet connection, it also works over a phone.
You can protect the iPad from being used as a weapon: Another reason that the FBI wants to use a third party device to get into the iPhone is to circumvent the encryption built into the device. The phone’s built in encryption does not make it easy for a third party to access the data. The iPhone uses a chip that is too small to fit on the side of the device.
The FBI’s Back Door Searches Don’t Work: The FBI’s investigation also uses a third party app called FaceTime. This third party app is simply a piece of software that connects with the iPhone and gives the FBI access to data stored on the phone.
The investigators didn’t bother to ask Apple whether it would unlock the phone for them, and they didn’t call Apple first to get permission. Instead, they asked the company for assistance in accessing data off of the phone without the user’s help.
Under the Fourth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment says that a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to their own communications and that they have a right to use these communications without fear of them being read. They cannot be forced to turn over information that they do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in.
In closing, I want to emphasize the importance of understanding the differences between the two companies involved in this case and in helping you understand the Case Study Solution. This case has great significance, and it’s important to understand why privacy matters in this fight.