Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323932963

Building A Backdoor to the iPhone: What Dilemmas Did Tim Cook Face?

Preprint · March 2018


DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22149.04329

CITATIONS READS
0 1,833

1 author:

Michael Kountze
University of the Incarnate Word
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A Backdoor for the IPhone View project

Business Leadership and Ethics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael Kountze on 22 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Michael Kountze

DBA 8310

Building A Backdoor to the iPhone

What Dilemmas Did Tim Cook Face?

Tim Cook, the Chief Executive Officer of Apple, was faced with the predicament of protecting

the privacy of customer information versus releasing customer information to the Federal Bureau

of Information (FBI) to protect our nation’s security.

This situation was created when Syed Rizwan Farook, age 28 and his wife Tashfeen Malik, age

29, killed 14 employees at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California on

December 2, 2015. Another 22 persons were injured. The employees had been gathered in the

company’s conference room for a holiday party. Syed, who was also an employee of Inland

Regional Center, had attended the party but left early. He returned later with Tashfeen and shot

the staff members. Syed and Tashfeen used five firearms during the attack. It was determined

that Syed and Tashfeen had ties to terrorist organizations. Some of the rifles used by the couple

were purchased from the next-door neighbor, Enrique Marquez, Jr. (Enrique has since plead

guilty to aiding in the killings and will be sentenced on August 21, 2017). Both Syed and

Tashfeen died in their vehicle in a subsequent shoot-out with the police. The killings were the

worst terrorist attack since 9/11.

The FBI investigated the killings. It was discovered that Syed and Tashfeen had pipe bombs to

do further destruction. Also, based on an assessment of digital equipment at the couple’s home,

a larger assault was planned. Were there warning signs that the San Bernardino massacre would

take place? Tashfeen had sent private direct messages in 2012 and 2014 via Facebook pledging

1|P ag e
her allegiance to an Islamic terrorist organization. Other digital evidence at the home, including

email accounts, computer and smartphones were either erased or smashed. The FBI did find an

iPhone in the couple’s vehicle and this iPhone is at the center of this ethical dilemma.

The iPhone recovered belonged to Syed and was issued to him by his employer. The FBI wanted

to conduct a search of any communication on the phone as part of their investigation. However,

the phone was protected by a password. If the FBI failed after a number attempts to unlock the

phone, all data stored on the phone would be erased. The FBI asked Apple’s assistance in the

accessing the data. Specifically, the FBI wanted Apple to create software to decrypt the iPhone,

a “backdoor” that would allow the FBI to retrieve data in this investigation and future cases.

This software would disable the security feature that erased the data after 10 unsuccessful

attempts.

Tim Cook defied the FBI’s request. His reasons were:

• The government wanted Apple to create something that did not exist.

• The software that Apple would be required to create could fall into the wrong hands and

be used to unlock anyone’s iPhone.

• Building a backdoor would effectively make encryption a useless tool for protecting data.

• Apple would be ultimately hacking into its own users and reversing any security

measures it had created.

With this as the backdrop, Tim Cook felt compelled to protect his Apple brand as there was the

potential to lose a substantial part of his customer base if he acquiesced to the FBI’s demands.

Apple firmly believed its customers were concerned with the security and privacy of their

information stored on the iPhone. However, if Tim Cook agreed to the government’s request

2|P ag e
and built the software, Apple would be assisting in the fight against terrorists. The software

would enable the FBI to:

• Combat terrorism and aid in preventing future attacks.

• Assist in investigations by obtaining data in a speedy manner.

• Deter criminals from using their cellphones to communicate or store data.

In this situation, you can argue that secure phones save lives. You can also argue that a way to

unsecure phones could save future lives. Tim Cook ultimately thought it was best that iPhones

remain as secure as possible.

What were Cook's primary responsibilities, which would have influenced his decision to

refuse to succumb to U.S Government pressure to build a backdoor to the iPhone?

Tim Cook’s primary responsibility was to act in the best interest of Apple’s loyal customers.

Today, cellphones are rarely used to make phone calls. Rather, cellphones are storage units of

personal information. Whether texting, emailing, making videos, accessing an app or retaining

photos, the cellphone is a personal window into our lives. Apple realized this and began

encrypting data on its phones. Apple’s encryption feature was so stringent, even its own

engineers could not extract data from phones or tablets. Privacy was a paramount issue with

Apple. Privacy was also a deeply personal issue with Tim Cook. After becoming CEO in 2011,

it wasn’t until 2014 that Tim Cook revealed to the world that he was gay.

Tim Cook also had a responsibility to the technology community to stand his ground. If Apple

had created the software, other technology companies such as Google, Yahoo, Samsung, and

Microsoft would be expected to comply and create backdoors when requested by governmental

3|P ag e
entities. It would set a precedent for the entire industry, not just in the United States but in other

countries as well.

Another important concern to Apple was the possibility of the backdoor software falling into the

hands of hackers, criminals, terrorists and unstable regimes. If this were to happen, the security

of iPhone data would be severely comprised and in the long-term, the backdoor software would

aid the terrorists it was intended to capture.

Lastly, Tim had an obligation to the shareholders of Apple and its brand. The iPhone

represented two-thirds of Apple’s revenue in 2016 and if Apple were to compromise the security

of its own phones, it is possible those users would switch to another brand. Apple had already

suffered an embarrassing breach of its iCloud when hundreds of nude photos of celebrities were

leaked over the internet in August 2014. Also, this was on the heels of Edward Snowden, a

former Central Intelligence Agency employee, revealing that the U.S. government had conducted

surveillance on persons without their knowledge by accessing emails, photos, videos, and phone

calls in the effort to combat terrorism. overall, there was a public backlash when U.S. citizens

learned the most intimate parts of their lives were being tracked by the government. The

backlash included Apple as users questioned the ability of the company to protect their

information.

Examine the contradiction in responsibilities, if any.

Tim Cook says he is afraid that by creating the software, he will ultimately make a master key

that will enable anyone to crack the encryption of an iPhone. He is afraid it will ultimately aid

terrorists like Syed and Tashfeen. However, by not creating a backdoor software, he is aiding

Syed and Tashfeen. The FBI may have found evidence to assist in the San Bernardino murders

4|P ag e
if they had been able to unlock the phone. By not creating the software, Apple conveniently has

a way of avoiding similar FBI requests in the future. An additional concern is that Apple has

given a green light to other terrorists to use the iPhone in the future. Terrorists will use the

iPhone since the data is private and unable to be decrypted. While Tim Cook preaches that he is

making the world safer by not offering a backdoor, he is actually encouraging terrorists to use his

product.

Also, Apple is in the business of selling iPhones. Every new model of the iPhone has

enhancements to encourage customers to buy their phones. While encryption is an important

enhancement demanded by its customers, Apple also used the feature to its advantage. Prior to

the iOS 8, Apple was subject to numerous national-security requests. With the introduction of

the iOS 8, Apple not only encrypted all personal information but made it impossible for its own

engineers to access the data. By not giving their engineers access, Apple provided a way to

avoid giving law enforcement information, even with a warrant.

Finally, Tim Cook had a responsibility to the victims of the San Bernardino murders. These

persons were customers of his as they were employees of the Inland Regional Center. The

Inland Regional Center had a business account with Apple and had issued an iPhone to Syed. To

overlook the responsibility Tim Cook had to the persons killed, especially when Inland Regional

Center was an Apple account, seems hypocritical. It can be interpreted that Tim Cook thought

more of his company than the 14 lives that were lost.

Using Badaracco's framework, assess the ways in which Tim Cook may have resolved these

dilemmas.

According to Badaracco, there are four questions to be assessed when facing a dilemma:

5|P ag e
1. Which course of action will do the most good and the least harm?

2. Which alternative best serves others' rights, including shareholders' rights?

3. What plan can I live with, which is consistent with basic values and commitments?

4. Which course of action is feasible in the world as it is?

Using the utilitarian approach, I believe Tim Cook’s response did the most good and produced

the least harm. While not complying with the government’s request offered the most benefit to

Apple, it certainly did harm to the FBI. The societal impacts need to be looked at in the short-

term and long-term. In the short-term, not supplying the backdoor negatively impacted the case

against the shooters. The FBI may have recovered information that would have assisted the

investigation and given comfort to the families of the victims. In the long-term, the backdoor

could have assisted the FBI in future investigations and may have prevented future terrorist

attacks. However, the harm suffered by the FBI was outweighed by the benefit non-compliance

offered.

Tim Cook’s response best served the Apple brand and its shareholders. Apple was able to avoid

the cost and time of building a backdoor. They were able appease customers who felt privacy

was a significant factor in choosing an iPhone. They avoided breaking the law since there were

no specific laws regarding this issue. If lawmakers in Washington D.C. had enacted a law for

technology companies to provide encrypted data, Tim’s decision would have been more difficult

to make. There was draft legislation in 2010 under the Obama administration to do just that

however the law was not enacted after the Edward Snowden revelations. A similar law was

passed under the Clinton administration which required the phone companies to build digital

networks that government agents could tap into.

6|P ag e
As discussed previously, if Tim Cook had complied with the FBI and the backdoor had been

built to decrypt the data, the software could possibly have fallen into the wrong hands and been

used for criminal activities. Additionally, creating the software would have led to future requests

by the FBI and other government agencies causing a log jam of demands at Apple. As the article

stated for the first six months of 2015, Apple received 750 to 999 national security requests from

the U.S. government. It is safe to say this number would have increased if Apple had found a

way to create a backdoor. The only downside for Apple would be if public opinion valued

security over privacy and customers sided against Apple. Shortly after the murders, public

sentiment sided with the FBI as most Americans were in favor of the FBI gaining access to the

iPhone. In a PEW Research Center survey conducted in February 2016, 51% of those surveyed

felt Apple should comply with the FBI request for a backdoor while 38% felt Apple should not

unlock the cellphone.

Apple’s commitment to customer privacy would have been tested if Tim Cook went to jail for

his stance against the FBI. Tim made his decision to stand up to FBI without any repercussions

to himself or the company. Also, no fines or other penalties were imposed. With no impact to

leadership or any fines paid, the company and its shareholders were mostly spared any negative

impact.

Tim Cook took the action that best suited not only Apple, but the Silicon Valley. Executives at

several technology companies backed Tim Cook in his stand against the FBI. Sundar

Pinchai, CEO of Google was quoted as saying:

“Forcing companies to enable hacking could compromise users’ privacy. We build

secure products to keep your information safe and we give law enforcement access to

7|P ag e
data based on valid legal orders. But that’s wholly different than requiring companies to

enable hacking of customer devices & data."

Meanwhile, those in Washington D.C., not surprisingly, sided with the FBI in the argument.

Donald Trump, while on the campaign trail for his presidency in South Carolina, made the

following statement.

"First of all, Apple ought to give the security for that phone. What I think you ought to do

is boycott Apple until such time as they give that security number.”

Ultimately, Tim Cook stayed true to his principles. The San Bernardino murders occurred on

December 2, 2015 but as far back as 2010, Cook said privacy was important to Apple. The

company “has always had a very different view of privacy than some of our colleagues in the

Valley,” he said that year. By late 2013, Apple made all third-party data stored on customers’

phones encrypted by default. Under Tim Cook’s predecessor, Steve Jobs, Apple was defined by

innovation and the latest gadget introduced. That emphasis shifted when Tim Cook became

CEO in 2011. With Tim at the helm, customer privacy became a high priority at Apple. Apple

most likely will continue to devise operating systems that are more and more “backdoor-proof”.

As stated by Jonathan Mayer, a computer scientist and lawyer at Stanford, “Any attempt to

mandate backdoors will merely escalate an arms race, where usable and secure software stays a

step ahead of the government.”

What should Tim Cook have done?

The response by Apple was the right one given the conditions at the time. Absent a federal law

in place to create the backdoor, Tim Cook made the most reasonable decision for his company.

Apple is Tim Cook’s most important responsibility as the company’s CEO and most visible

8|P ag e
spokesperson. To comply with the FBI’s request would only hurt his company financially

through a) the time and expense to create the backdoor; b) the possible loss of customers since

the iPhone’s security would have been compromised; and c) the data breaches and lawsuits if a

backdoor got into the hands of hackers. Also, the government was not going to reimburse Apple

for any financial losses incurred as a result of the backdoor.

For the long-term health of his company, employees and investors, Tim made the right choice.

9|P ag e
References

Barrett, B. (2016, February 24). The Apple-FBI Fight isn’t about privacy vs. security. Don’t be
misled. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2016/02/apple-fbi-privacy-security/
Brandom, R. (2016, February 19). Donald Trump calls for a boycott of Apple products.
Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/19/11071684/donald-trump-apple-
boycott-encryption-iphone

Christensen, D. & Boneck, R. (2010). Four questions for analyzing the right versus right
dilemmas of managers. Journal of Business Case Studies, 6(3), 53 – 58.
DiBlasio, N. & Weise, E. (2016, February 16). Here’s why the FBI forcing Apple to break into
an iPhone is a big deal. Retrieved from
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/02/16/heres-why-fbi-forcing-apple-break-
into-iphone-big-deal/80481766/

Dillett, R. (2016, February 23). Most Americans support FBI over Apple, finds Pew. Retrieved
from https://techcrunch.com/2016/02/23/most-americans-support-justice-department-
over-apple-finds-pew/
Elmer-Dewitt, P. (2016, February 18). Apple vs. FBI: What opinion makers are saying.
Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2016/02/18/apple-fbi-opinion-makers/

Esquivel, P. (2016, February 16). Father of San Bernardino terror victim condemns plea
agreement for gunman's friend. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-
me-ln-sb-terror-plea-20170216-story.html

Everything we know about the San Bernardino terror attack investigation so far. (2015,
December 14). Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-san-
bernardino-shooting-terror-investigation-htmlstory.html
Farvinar, C. (2014, September 17). Apple expands data encryption under iOS 8, making
handover to cops moot. Retrieved from https://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/apple-
expands-data-encryption-under-ios-8-making-handover-to-cops-moot/
Fishel, J., Seigel, B., & Shapiro, E. (2015, December 22). Inside the immigration file of San
Bernardino shooter Tashfeen Malik. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/US/inside-
immigration-file-san-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik/story?id=35912170
Graham, J. and Swartz, J. (2016, August 24). Tim Cook at 5 years: More profits, less innovation.
Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/08/24/tim-cook-5-years-more-
profits-less-innovation/89206978/
Kelion, L. (2014, September 17). Apple toughens iCloud security after celebrity breach.
Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29237469

10 | P a g e
Khatibloo, F. (2016, February 18). Apple does the right thing to defend customer privacy.
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2016/02/18/apple-does-the-right-
thing-to-defend-customer-privacy/#76e7ec5016b1

Kovach, S. (2014, September 2). We still don't have assurance from Apple that iCloud is safe.
Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-statement-on-icloud-hack-2014-9
Litchblau, E. & Benner, L. (2016, February 17). Apple fights order to unlock San Bernardino
Gunman’s iPhone. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/technology/apple-timothy-cook-fbi-san-
bernardino.html?_r=0
Mansharamani V. (2016, March 11). Why Apple vs. FBI might be the worst cybersecurity
dilemma ever. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/why-apple-
vs-fbi-might-be-the-worst-cybersecurity-dilemma-ever/
Mayer, J. (2015, April 28). You can’t backdoor a platform. Retrieved from
http://webpolicy.org/2015/04/28/you-cant-backdoor-a-platform/
Swartz, J. (2016, March 7). This is Tim Cook’s Apple: Clash over iPhone redefines Steve Jobs’
company. Retrieved from
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2016/03/07/tim-cooks-apple-steve-jobs-
iphone-fbi/81074824/

Swartz, J. (2016, February 26). Apple’s Cook stresses privacy, Asia growth plans to investors.
Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/02/26/cook-underscores-
privacy-stance-apple-shareholders-meeting/80924600/

Sandoval, G. (2016, February 16). Apple’s moral dilemma: Help FBI break into terrorist’s
phone or protect users’ privacy. Retrieved from http://www.geekwire.com/2016/apple-
faces-moral-dilemma-help-fbi-break-into-terrorist-phone-or-protect-users-privacy/

11 | P a g e

View publication stats

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen