'This would be bad for America,' Tim Cook tells ABC News about creating iPhone backdoor
Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook will take to the airwaves this evening in an exclusive interview with ABC's World News Tonight with David Muir, where he will explain why his company refuses to create a "backdoor" to unlock iPhones for the FBI.
Teasing tonight's interview with Muir, ABC shared a pair of snippets from the discussion. In their conversation, Cook explained that while public safety is important, so too is the protection of people's data.
"This is not something that we would create. This would be bad for America," Cook said of creating backdoor access to unlocking iPhones. "It would also set a precedent that I believe many people in America would be offended by."
Muir also asked Cook about how much communication his company had with the U.S. Justice Department before things came to a head in court last week. Cook said he wished there was more dialogue between the government and Apple before the issue became a public fight.
"This filing, we found out about the filing from the press," Cook said. "And I don't think that's the way the railroad should be run. And I don't think something so important to this country should be handled in this way."
The interview with Apple's CEO will air on World News Tonight with David Muir, which airs from 6:30 to 7 p.m. Eastern. An extended version of the interview will be available on ABCNews.com immediately after the broadcast airs.
Apple was apparently blindsided last week, 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 a passcode-protected iPhone 5c that the FBI seeks to unlock.
Following the judge's order, Apple has taken an extremely proactive and public approach to dealing with the issue. Cook himself issued an open letter to say that the creation of a backdoor tool to access a locked iPhone would set a bad precedent. Security advocates and tech industry insiders have largely sided with Apple, expressing concern over the power the government could wield if it were given backdoor entry into mobile platforms like Apple's iOS.
Government officials are locked out of the handset because, in the midst of their investigation, officials changed the passcode associated with the Apple ID used to back up the iPhone 5c. Had officials not changed that passcode via the Web, the iPhone could have been connected to a known Wi-Fi network and backed up to iCloud, at which point Apple would have been able to access the data in question.
Teasing tonight's interview with Muir, ABC shared a pair of snippets from the discussion. In their conversation, Cook explained that while public safety is important, so too is the protection of people's data.
"This is not something that we would create. This would be bad for America," Cook said of creating backdoor access to unlocking iPhones. "It would also set a precedent that I believe many people in America would be offended by."
Muir also asked Cook about how much communication his company had with the U.S. Justice Department before things came to a head in court last week. Cook said he wished there was more dialogue between the government and Apple before the issue became a public fight.
"This filing, we found out about the filing from the press," Cook said. "And I don't think that's the way the railroad should be run. And I don't think something so important to this country should be handled in this way."
The interview with Apple's CEO will air on World News Tonight with David Muir, which airs from 6:30 to 7 p.m. Eastern. An extended version of the interview will be available on ABCNews.com immediately after the broadcast airs.
Apple was apparently blindsided last week, 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 a passcode-protected iPhone 5c that the FBI seeks to unlock.
Following the judge's order, Apple has taken an extremely proactive and public approach to dealing with the issue. Cook himself issued an open letter to say that the creation of a backdoor tool to access a locked iPhone would set a bad precedent. Security advocates and tech industry insiders have largely sided with Apple, expressing concern over the power the government could wield if it were given backdoor entry into mobile platforms like Apple's iOS.
Government officials are locked out of the handset because, in the midst of their investigation, officials changed the passcode associated with the Apple ID used to back up the iPhone 5c. Had officials not changed that passcode via the Web, the iPhone could have been connected to a known Wi-Fi network and backed up to iCloud, at which point Apple would have been able to access the data in question.
Comments
I'm happy Apple products protect their users globally.
cup.
Kramer: What do you mean?
Stan: Have her try on the bra, see if it fits.
Fixed.
Trust Apple to be the ones to make a stand against Microsoft, Google, the US legal system, and now the worst aspects of US culture. Trust Apple to make a difference, to look to the future, and to bring a better future today. I vote Tim Cook for CEO of Apple, where he can continue making a difference!
Ok. There is no pertinent information on terrorist phones.
Never had been and never will be.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
The FBI had their chances to get at the info until their idiocy and ineptness became known and the company changed the account password. But don't let little things like details and facts get in the way.
Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence.[1] This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several logical fallacies, including appeal to consequences, appeal to fear, appeal to flattery, appeal to pity, appeal to ridicule, appeal to spite, and wishful thinking.
Instead of facts, persuasive language is used to develop the foundation of an appeal to emotion-based argument. Thus, the validity of the premises that establish such an argument does not prove to be verifiable.[2]
Hey, its fine if you waant to be pro terrorist.
At least we know.
Oh, ad cry me a fucking river.
I spent time in Iraq in the Army. I got a little different perspective about these cretin than you do.