Our View: Apple or FBI? Who is really protecting us?

If the FBI can’t see what’s on Syed Farook’s smartphone, any other terrorists involved in the massacre of 14 people in San Bernardino might go undetected. If Apple is forced to help the government unlock Farook’s phone, the privacy of iPhone users around the globe will be compromised.

We don’t take either Apple or the FBI at their word. This case is not that clear-cut.

To help resolve this dispute, the courts should call in experts and advocates to find a balance between privacy and security in the age of digital communication and terrorism. As the courts grapple, Congress should be doing the same. And the question should be asked: Does the government have the right to conscript private enterprise? If so, under what circumstances?

Many say there might isn’t a technological solution to satisfy both sides. We doubt that. As suggested by software entrepreneur Vivek Wadhwa in Friday’s Bee, Apple could develop a secondary device to crack this specific phone’s code without providing access to all phones. Apple has done it before.

If that works, then how long it will take before others figure it out, and start selling periphery devices to create backdoors into every cell phone? What then?

Ask yourself, whom do you trust less – the government or corporate America. Some choice.

Deservedly, the federal government lost credibility with the National Security Agency’s sweeping domestic surveillance. We and many privacy advocates have been critical of bulk collection of phone records without specific warrants. This case is different; the FBI got a warrant for a very specific phone.

By the same token, tech corporations brag about protecting privacy – when it suits them. More quietly, they share customer data whenever it’s profitable.

Apple has every right to fight the court order, but it’s hardly the white knight of Silicon Valley. Those standing with Apple, like Facebook and Twitter, are no different.

Generally, we give more weight to Americans’ privacy. But we’re left wondering whose privacy will be violated here. The White House says the FBI is asking Apple to defeat security features only on Farook’s iPhone 5C, not every phone. The judge’s order even specifies any software should include a “unique identifier” so it can’t be used on any other phone.

Not possible, says Apple CEO Tim Cook; he warns customers any such software would give government “the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data.” If such software got into the wrong hands, he says, it would be a bonanza for cybercriminals or foreign powers. “The U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create,” he said.

This faceoff has been building. Companies enhance encryption and security features on digital devices so we’ll feel more secure putting more personal and financial data on them, moving toward a cashless society. Part of Apple’s business model is to get customers to use Apple Pay, which stores credit and debit card information.

FBI Director James Comey told Congress last week that law enforcement is increasingly having trouble accessing devices even with a warrant in hand. It’s no accident the FBI chose the Dec. 2 bloodbath in San Bernardino, the deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, to make its stand.

Apple has encrypted iPhones since 2014. With the newest operating system, the phones can be set up to wipe all data after too many wrong tries to enter the user’s passcode.

So while Cook might be right to sound the alarm, he’s also looking out for his company’s bottom line. And that might not be our bottom line.

This story was originally published February 19, 2016 at 4:00 PM with the headline "Our View: Apple or FBI? Who is really protecting us?."