ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Apple versus the FBI and soon the world

Updated on March 8, 2016
RJ Schwartz profile image

I try to present technology issues in a way that people can easily understand them

In the world of technology, security of data is one of the most challenging and important tasks at every level. From the individual to the IT executives at multinational firms, data-security can be the difference between success and failure. Data security mitigates risk, enables effective collaboration between peers, guards against theft of proprietary processes, products, and strategies, and provides an assurance against piracy, alteration, or sabotage of confidential files. With handheld devices leapfrogging into a dominant role as the most preferred piece of technology to transfer and store data, an effective security strategy must begin with your choice of handheld device. One of the most sought after handheld devices is the iPhone by Apple for its security as well as many other features.



Apple has committed to users of its iPhone products, “The most personal technology must also be the most private.” This statement is boldly presented front and center on Apple’s website. They’ve created a system that is highly secure and they regularly update protocols to insure they stay current and effective. Owners of Apple products are loyal and many cite this level of privacy as a big reason why they stay with Apple products. Apple also states, again in big bold letters that, “We believe security shouldn’t come at the expense of individual privacy.” Apple also shares its policies on how requests for information are handled and their adherence to the law. On Apple devices running iOS 8 and later versions, the user’s personal data is placed under the protection of their passcode which is not stored anywhere at Apple. This means that Apple cannot perform data extraction in response to government search warrants because the files to be extracted are protected by an encryption key tied to that passcode. Apple seems to be quite transparent in what the can, cannot, and will do, which includes never allowing government access to Apple servers and the flat out refusal to “hack” their own technology to create a backdoor to break into their products.

The FBI angle

The public fight between Apple and the United States Government started when the FBI approached Apple about cracking the security on an iPhone which was previously owned by an Islamic terrorist who had been killed after executing 14 and wounding 22 at a California public benefit corporation. Apple does not have an unlock protocol for its products nor would they “hack” their own security to allow the government to have access to the phone’s memory. Senior leadership at Apple said any such attempt would undermine security and privacy for all customers. The FBI on the other hand says Apple is just protecting its brand and should be compelled to meet their request and proceeded to get a court order to force Apple’s hand.

All Writ's Act

The FBI is basing their case on a 227 year old law which was signed by none other than George Washington called the All Writ’s Act which is a Federal Stature which states that:

(a) The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.

(b) An alternative writ or rule nisi may be issued by a justice or judge of a court which has jurisdiction.

Application of the All Writs Act requires the fulfillment of four conditions:

The absence of alternative remedies—the act is only applicable when other judicial tools are not available.

An independent basis for jurisdiction—the act authorizes writs in aid of jurisdiction, but does not in itself create any federal subject-matter jurisdiction.

Necessary or appropriate in aid of jurisdiction—the writ must be necessary or appropriate to the particular case.

Usages and principles of law—the statute requires courts to issue writs "agreeable to the usages and principles of law."

Since everyone isn’t a legal scholar, it’s necessary to translate this into terms that can be understood by all. Specifically, this law gives power to the Federal Government to force people or companies to do something as long as it’s not in violation of the law. A Writ is an older term that means a formal order. This vague law certainly had an impact in the early days of the nation but currently seems contradictory to our basic freedoms. Yet it has been used often by the Federal Government, albeit quietly to engage in spying on the American public. In 1977 it was used to force phone companies to help set up devices that record all numbers called from a specific phone line. In 1999, the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act also utilized it to require all cellphone providers to be able to geolocate their customers’ phones. In 2005 a federal judge ruled against it being used to force a phone company to allow real-time tracking of a phone without a warrant.

Apple Cooperation doesn't satisfy FBI

Despite the fact that Apple was working with the FBI and quickly provided them with everything they had backed up in their cloud data storage, the agency wanted more. They demanded that Apple crack the phone itself so they can see what else is on it even though there is no evidence that anything else is on the phone. The court order specifically asks Apple to create a new, custom version of their operating system that will run only on that iPhone, but one that will make three changes to the software. Collectively the first two would disable the auto-wipe function and the delay the time limits on how quickly new passcodes can be entered. The court also asks Apple to add a way to attach a cable or wirelessly connect to the iPhone so the FBI can automatically enter passcodes so they can use a supercomputer to bombard the phone with passcode guesses until it finds the right one. The iPhone has security protocols built in which automatically erase the phone after 10 failed password attempts plus entering a wrong code activates a delay in how soon you can try to re-enter it.

Engineers at Apple could potentially do the requested task with a huge outlay of time and manpower, however that's not the point, says Apple's CEO Tim Cook. He argues that Apple can't just bypass their protections for a single phone and still expect all other phones to stay safe and secure. "Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices," Cook wrote in an open letter to customers earlier this week. "In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks." To those of us on the outside observing, it seems like another government overreach to spy on citizens.

Enter the French

The fight has escalated and spread across the Atlantic, with French lawmakers working on a policy that will impose prison time and hefty penalties on IT executives who refuse to give them access to encrypted data during a terrorist investigation. Their version of the rule would force technology manufacturers to provide the information at any cost by any means necessary. This forced cooperation is a disgraceful display of strong arm tactics and government overreach. At the moment there are no confirmed sources that tie the actions in France with the actions taken by the FBI, but many are already speculating that global governmental cooperation is just emerging that will try to get the upper hand on manufacturers who produce secure products.

Globalists and Questionable Polling

In another emerging story, a recent report is being used as a tool to support the overreach being demonstrated. According to a survey conducted by the Center for International Governance Innovation, the majority of people in several big countries believe that companies should not develop technologies to prevent law enforcement from accessing online conversations. This group is a think tank for global governance with a core belief that global governance will benefit everyone. It sounds an awful lot like a “New World Order” group trying to wrest control of the planet from individual countries and grant those powers to its own membership. Understanding this fact is importance for how the so-called survey results are to be interpreted. Notice that the report doesn’t say data security but online conversations, which suggest e-mail, phone, or text messages.

It would appear that in order to win over public support that these globalists are creating and spinning favorable polling to support the case of the FBI and now with France joining in will push even harder to get what they want. Yet, the opposition is also heating up with activist groups taking the side of Apple and the right to privacy. Many minority groups who have felt they were under illegal surveillance for years are making their voices heard. The hashtag #DontHackApple is prevalent on Twitter in support of privacy. Protesters who own iPhones have had them seized by police who were unable to access their private information without a warrant are supporting Apple. If Apple were to capitulate, then would be criminals and terrorists would simply switch to another product, rendering the entire series of events moot.



This battle is sure to go on until it reaches the highest courts in the land, and early odds are that Apple will emerge victorious. There is more at stake than just the iPhone battle. Are we as American’s going to allow our government to force any company or citizen to do whatever they feel is needed, just because they say so? Where do our freedoms end and tyranny begin? Does freedom of speech also apply to data? At this point in time, no one can say where the case will end up, only that it will be highly visible and many more factions will weigh in.



Submit a Comment
  • RJ Schwartz profile imageAUTHOR

    Ralph Schwartz 

    4 years ago from Idaho Falls, Idaho

    The Justice Department withdrew its legal action against Apple, Monday, confirming that an outside method to bypass the locking function of a San Bernardino terrorist’s phone has proved successful.

  • bradmasterOCcal profile image


    4 years ago


    It is not that I don't believe that Apple should prevail, but if the case goes up to the SC is when they will lose. I say this based on all the previous cases where the gov prevailed at the SC.

    I also don't believe that the SC has made many good decisions in its lifetime, especially the 5-4 decisions but that is another hub.

    It would be refreshing and just if the SC would decide in favor of Apple.

  • Express10 profile image

    H C Palting 

    4 years ago from East Coast

    I agree with you RJ in that I also believe that Apple should prevail because the FBI can't prove there is crucial info on that phone but also because the laws have not caught up with technology. I am not in support of this type of government overreach and find it truly frightening that so many people remain silent.

  • RJ Schwartz profile imageAUTHOR

    Ralph Schwartz 

    4 years ago from Idaho Falls, Idaho

    Thanks - I too thought more people would comment, but it's still early. I think Apple will prevail just because the FBI can't prove there is info so valuable on that device that it warrants a huge company compromising their technology

  • bradmasterOCcal profile image


    4 years ago


    A brilliantly done piece on the Apple case.

    Once again, the viewers disappoint in not commenting. My excuse is that I have yet to master the automatic notification, I get some notifications about hubs, and questions, but I have had to manually follow my own questions to see if there were answers.

    Back to the ranch.

    As I stated in my question, the government is using the fear of terrorists to circumvent the 4th amendment. The Patriot Act was not constitutional, but the SC favors the government over the constitution. The SC never finds an issue with the Income Tax even though its application violate the 4th and 5th amendments.

    So the SC will most likely favor the government over Apple, but doing so will circumvent the constitution, and its 4th amendment.

    As I said also, forcing 100% of the people to comply with losing their privacy on the off hand some very small percentage of bad guys will be found is insane.

    In another ?, I asked if people were in favor of amending the constitution, one answer, no.

    You laid out the issues in the hub that should have brought an onslaught of comments, but alas zero. The government has been funded with trillions of dollars over the years to develop anti terrorist actions, and they should do it, not Apple.

    The government possesses the most powerful computers in the world, and the most expensive as well. The reason that all the US defenses, and all of their expensive equipment failed to protect us on 911 was that we didn't have human communication and protocols that worked in place.

    The government had Osama Bin Laden Killed rather than captured, although he had a lot of terrorist information, even if he wasn't still a player.

    These are the kinds of anti terrorism tactics we need the government to pursue, and not making everyone lose their privacy. We already have credit card companies, club businesses, and other companies tracking the details of our lives, and now the government wants to strip us naked.

    We are only years away from being forced to get a tracking implant like we have for our pets.

    At the same time, the hackers roam the cyber world, and they loot, pillage, steal, vandalize, and commit many other crimes. Yet, the government offers no safety for the average person on the Internet, and identity theft has no real quick solution to restore the digital life of the person that got hacked.

    The bottom line is that the Bill of Rights should protect us from the government, and maybe we need to add amendments to clarify, and fortify these rights.

    The problem is that most people don't think this is a problem, unless it affects them now.

    Great hub


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)