Ed Apple not right

iPhone maker should take part in global terrorism fight

The ongoing dispute between Apple and the U.S. government is not the typical case of privacy versus law and order. The outcome will have far-reaching effects on the ongoing global fight against terrorism and how it may be reconciled with personal freedoms.

Considering the sensitivity and gravity of the issue, every caution should be taken against a hasty conclusion. Still when the issue comes down to the prevention of life-ending terrorist acts, it’s inevitable that Apple should stop resisting the law and cooperate.

This spirit of cooperation should also apply to similar cases taking place outside the U.S. in light of of the global scale and enormity of terrorism, perhaps through a panel as suggested by Apple CEO Tim Cook.

This case with Apple involves an FBI request to gain access to data stored in the iPhone belonging to Syed Rizwan Farook, a U.S. citizen born to Pakistani parents, who killed 14 people and injured 22 in the Dec. 2 shooting spree in San Bernandino, Calif. His mass killings, assisted by his wife, are presumed to have been “inspired by foreign terrorist groups” with efforts to link him with any specific terrorist groups obviously not going well.

Apple rejected the FBI requests and the court intervened to order a software alteration to enable the law enforcers to go around Apple’s standard safety measures that, after 10 failed attempts at getting around the pass codes, erase data in the device. Or the FBI could try 10,000 combinations to find Farook’s four-digit code but it takes eons because each failed attempt results in an added delay before the next try.

Apple claimed that the court order, if implemented, would set a “dangerous precedent” according to Cook, by creating a “back door,” which can be taken advantage of by hackers as well.

As the maker of some of the world’s best-selling smartphones used by millions across the globe, it’s laudable for Apple to stage a spirited fight. After all, what Cook is trying to do is protect their privacy, as he argued that accommodating the court order will violate “everyone’s civil liberties.” His concern is understandable in light of damning revelations made by former CIA employee Edward Snowden that the U.S. government obsessively and indiscriminately is engaged in data mining, and personal privacy is at the bottom of its concerns list.

Still, what if Farook’s attack was a precursor to a bigger plot that aims to maim and kill many times the casualties of the San Bernandino attack or goes for a second 9/11? There is a priority between civic duty and liberty. In this case, duty comes first. Cook’s duty is to comply with the court order and allow the authorities to take a peek inside Farooq’s phone.

For any fear of a security breach stemming from its cooperation with the authorities, it behooves Apple, the world’s most innovative firm, to come up with updates to ensure the FBI’s intrusion will, as promised, not extend beyond the single phone that belonged to the terrorist.

Last but not least, the spirit of cooperation with the U.S. authorities should be put to use in cases of terrorism in other countries. Recent data shows that the U.S. firm has rejected requests for help from other countries disproportionately. Cook’s suggestion for the creation of a committee may be taken up so as to establish a guideline on how tech firms and governments will act in terrorism cases not just in the U.S. but also across the world.