Billionaire Mark Cuban says Apple deserves a 'standing ovation' for fighting FBI on encryption
Apple did "exactly the right thing" by refusing a request from the U.S. government to create a backdoor to access a terrorist's locked iPhone, billionaire Mark Cuban wrote in response to the encryption controversy this week.
"Amen. A standing ovation," Cuban wrote on his personal blog, heaping praise upon Apple and its chief executive, Tim Cook, for refusing to comply with the FBI's order. In his view, if Apple were to comply, it would open the doors for countless situations in the future where the government could point to this case as a precedent.
"Every tool that protects our privacy and liberties against oppression, tyranny, madmen and worse can often be used to take those very precious rights from us," Cuban said. "But like we protect our 2nd Amendment Right, we must not let some of the negatives stand in the way of the positives. We must stand up for our rights to free speech and liberty."
Cuban believes American citizens should begin pushing their representatives to pass a law that limits the circumstances under which companies can be compelled to help the government break into a device. He proposed a series of four points that would justify such an instance:
Cuban admitted that the subject is "not an easy topic," but he believes an open discussion should be had for America to decide how to protect its citizens while also protecting personal liberties and security.
The open letter from Cuban joins a number of other high-profile names who have sided with Apple in its opposition to the government. Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft have also expressed support for Apple.
The controversy began Tuesday, when a U.S. magistrate judge ordered Apple to comply with FBI requests to help extract data from an iPhone owned by one of the shooters involved in the December terrorist attack in San Bernardino, Calif. The device in question is an iPhone 5c that was password protected by the gunman, and is set to erase a stored decryption key after ten unsuccessful login attempts.
Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook responded with his own letter on Wednesday, saying that the creation of a backdoor tool to access a locked iPhone could open the flood gates for future issues, rippling well beyond the investigation into the San Bernardino shooting. The terrorist attack resulted in 16 deaths and 24 injuries.
Apple has appealed the U.S. magistrate judge's ruling, and has until Feb. 26 to respond with a filing in court.
"Amen. A standing ovation," Cuban wrote on his personal blog, heaping praise upon Apple and its chief executive, Tim Cook, for refusing to comply with the FBI's order. In his view, if Apple were to comply, it would open the doors for countless situations in the future where the government could point to this case as a precedent.
"We must stand up for our rights to free speech and liberty." - Mark Cuban
"Every tool that protects our privacy and liberties against oppression, tyranny, madmen and worse can often be used to take those very precious rights from us," Cuban said. "But like we protect our 2nd Amendment Right, we must not let some of the negatives stand in the way of the positives. We must stand up for our rights to free speech and liberty."
Cuban believes American citizens should begin pushing their representatives to pass a law that limits the circumstances under which companies can be compelled to help the government break into a device. He proposed a series of four points that would justify such an instance:
- That the incident in question be declared an Act of Terrorism, with casualties
- That there is reason to believe the device was possessed by a participant in the incident
- The device must have been on location for the incident
- The terrorist who owned the device must be deceased
Cuban admitted that the subject is "not an easy topic," but he believes an open discussion should be had for America to decide how to protect its citizens while also protecting personal liberties and security.
The open letter from Cuban joins a number of other high-profile names who have sided with Apple in its opposition to the government. Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft have also expressed support for Apple.
The controversy began Tuesday, when a U.S. magistrate judge ordered Apple to comply with FBI requests to help extract data from an iPhone owned by one of the shooters involved in the December terrorist attack in San Bernardino, Calif. The device in question is an iPhone 5c that was password protected by the gunman, and is set to erase a stored decryption key after ten unsuccessful login attempts.
Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook responded with his own letter on Wednesday, saying that the creation of a backdoor tool to access a locked iPhone could open the flood gates for future issues, rippling well beyond the investigation into the San Bernardino shooting. The terrorist attack resulted in 16 deaths and 24 injuries.
Apple has appealed the U.S. magistrate judge's ruling, and has until Feb. 26 to respond with a filing in court.
Comments
Once you open the door you open the door not only for the US government but every government under which Apple sells phones.
And today it's just "terrorists", but tomorrow it's terrorist and pedophiles, and the next day it's terrorist and pedophiles and drug dealers, and the day after that it's terrorist and pedophiles and drug dealers and suspected criminals, and then...
Me, I think it's a giveaway to Authoritarianism, just a bit slower to make the FBI feel sad.
The PROBLEM with this is its far, far to generic.. Which is why so many are up in arms. What Mark Cuban is saying is we cannot allow the All Writs Act be used. We must require very narrow, specifically written laws from congress to be written to ensure their is accountability and limits.
The courts should not be making law, thats congresses job.. or is supposed to be! Otherwise we'll leave the "doors open" for future precedence in court.
I don't think he quite understands Apple's reasons for appealing the order. The DOJ is compelling Apple to create software that doesn't exist. Slavery was abolished in the US some time ago. Apple was pushed into an untenable situation to which they responded in the only way possible.
The DOJ graciously offered to pay for that software development. No one outside Apple knows what it cost them to develop iOS. Billions, certainly, Tens of billions? Who knows. Who cares? Write a blank check and stick it to the taxpayer, for a product that even the DOJ insists will be used once and only once, to obtain intelligence they don't even know exists.
This is political theater. The FBI wants everyone's personal information and by God they're going to get it. The government can be trusted with it. Right?
That's also specious. What can be considered an "Act of Terrorism" is open to interpretation and abuse. Who decides whether someone's actions are considered an Act of Terrorism or mere Workplace Violence? Was it the weapons used? Were there Koran verses invoked, or was it a Cross that was held high? Was it the dress, language, or appearance of the criminals? The manner of execution, whether it's being pushed off a building, burning alive in a cage, or beheading? Will it be the MPAA who decides on how much blood defines an R rating or mere PG?
No matter what, the casualties are still dead. Re-think that, Mark Cuban.
This is essentially no different than the case of a locked file cabinet in the home of a suspected criminal. Using existing law a judge issues a writ ordering a locksmith to open the cabinet, after which officers of the court remove and examine its contents for evidence that might bear on the case.
This isn't rocket science. The court may order Apple (the locksmith) to open this specific filing cabinet. t can't order Apple to make a generic skeleton key for the FBI that can open any filing cabinet. It would be foolish to think a court may not order a locked room, filing cabinet, car, etc. opened through use of a search warrant. It isn't unconstitutional, it's written directly into the 4th amendment.
The real question is, "can it be done". Apple is no more capable than anyone else when it comes to breaking strong encryption. The court may not order Apple to cease using strong encryption because it cannot produce a key. That's an entirely different situation. The proposal Cuban makes assumes some sort of capability to perform the operation of breaking into the phone under the conditions described (and I won't bother critiquing those conditions), but it can't be done under any conditions if strong encryption is used.
The courts may order Apple to break into an iPhone, but they can't make the order possible any more than they can order Pi to be equal to 3. The real question is, can they make strong encryption illegal? Practically they cannot, the demon is loose in the world. If Apple is tol to use weak encryption, anyone who cares about privacy and liberty will not buy Apple products.
Only yesterday a 15-year-old boy was arrested in Glasgow, Scotland over alleged computer hacking, with reports suggesting the target was the FBI network in the United States. The schoolboy was arrested on Tuesday under the Computer Misuse Act, which covers hacking and unauthorised access to computer material. The "Daily Record" newspaper reported that he was questioned by Police Scotland as FBI agents watched on!
Via the BBC News 'tech' page... http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-35603675