Mitch Albom, author of “Mitch Albom: FBI vs. Apple about more than a phone”, builds an overall effective editorial that supports the readers point of view by fighting for the protection of our phone information. In this case, a man named Syed Farook, killed and injured several people, including his wife. The FBI believes that accessing information from his phone may be able to help them with their case. They order Apple to build a new software that will allow them to bust into phones by being able to guess passwords as many times as they want; as of now, someone can only guess a password 10 times before the information is lost. In court, the FBI fights that the law requires businesses not involved in the case, have to execute court orders.…
Do you ever feel like you're living 1984 all over again? Getting watched everywhere you go without you knowing. Like come on now why are they watching us on what we're doing when it's a free county. First of all, are technology today is so advanced that they are watching us do everything they can hack into your phone camera that they are watching you without you knowing. They also hear your conversations when you talk on the phone.…
Post 9/11 Privacy Rights: The Case Against Electronic Surveillance In response to concerns about terrorism after the attacks on September 11,2001, the government of the United States enacted new guidelines for conducting surveillance on the public. This paper will discuss the implementation of electronic surveillance as a tool to combat terrorism and will make the case against sweeping electronic surveillance of American citizens and others in this country. Various examples of increased surveillance along with decreasing privacy right will help the reader to conclude that these tactics have not reduced incidents of any type of crime, including terrorism. This paper will also discuss several types of electronic surveillance, including the collection of metadata from telephone records, which intruded on the private lives of citizens and did not increase their safety in any meaningful way.…
Also they have invented a wiretap for busting any crimes such as planting bugs in certain rooms or chips right in the memory of your phone. This raises the question of “are we really free” or “I wonder what place doesn't have a microphone in it…
Potapchuk, John L. “A Second Bite at the Apple: Federal Courts' Authority to Compel Technical Assistance to Government Agents in Accessing Encrypted Smartphone Data, Under the All Writs Act.” Boston College School of Law, vol. 57, no. 4, 2016, pp. 1403–1446. ABI/INFORM Global, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2768374.…
Trevor Timm of The Guardian adds to this, saying “analysts would search over 17,000 phone numbers…every day. It turns out only about 1,800 of those numbers – 11 percent – met the legal requirement that the NSA have ‘reasonable articulable suspicion’ that the number was involved in terrorism” (Timm, Trevor). Both the NSA and President Obama have claimed repeatedly that the NSA has not abused its power, yet a “FISA court…
Cell Phones: An Annotated Bibliography The articles and studies below examine several different aspects pertaining to cell phones. In many of the studies below it can be seen that cell phones are not as private as one would think. With that said one would think that only hackers could evade your privacy true hackers are one, but Law enforcement is the biggest. Does Law Enforcement abide by the law or do they think that they are above the law.…
In the article titled “Forcing Apple to Hack That IPhone Sets a Dangerous Precedent”, Congressman Darrell Issa argues that protecting the privacy of millions of people should be more important that forcing Apple to unlock an iPhone that a terrorist used. Congressman Issa suggests that forcing Apple to create new software to unlock the device will put privacy of millions of people at risk. Congressman Issa writes this article in response to the controversial decision of the court to force Apple to create software to unlock a phone of a terrorist, who “killed 14 people” in San Bernardino (Issa, Paragraph 2). In the article, through the use of rhetorical question, simile and statistical facts, Congressman Issa is able to effectively show the readers…
government has used a relaxed approach to the Fourth Amendment. After September 11th, 2001, Congress enabled the Patriot Act in order to prevent future attacks from terrorists and protect the United States from other threats. The Patriot Act, as the Department of Justice states, provides “law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism” (the U.S. Patriot Act: Preserving Life and Liberty) allowing them to access the information that is necessary for terrorist investigations and making it easier to prevent attacks. The Patriot Act also states that law enforcement is authorized to “obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred”, which means that if there is evidence of terrorist activity, law enforcement is able to investigate. This involves the examination of personal records such as phone records and other personal records.…
After 9/11 occurred, the Bush Administration designed a law called the “Patriot Act.” The purpose of the Patriot Act is to surveil cellphones, tablets and anything that has a connection to the internet without you knowing. It is unconstitutional…
The National Security Agency (NSA) is an organization that is a part of the United States government that is responsible for the collection and processing of worldwide data records as well as global monitoring. According to an article from Electronic Frontier Foundation, the NSA is “responsible for collecting, processing, and disseminating intelligence information from foreign electronic signals for national foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes and to support military operations” (EFF). Incorporated in that professional and sophisticated definition, one of the rights that the administration owns is the right to view mobile phone data of those inhabiting the United States and globally across the world.…
On June 6th, 2013 The Guardian and the Washington Post revealed the fact that the NSA had access to customer information on Apple, Microsoft, and Google computer products. The information obtained by the NSA was allegedly used to prevent any terrorist actions. However, the NSA has “[built] up a store of information on millions of US citizens, regardless of whether or not they are ‘persons of interest’ to the agency” (Brown). Although terrorist plots are a legitimate threat to America, the U.S government has overstepped its boundaries by violating the citizen’s of America’s fourth amendment right to privacy.…
National security vs personal privacy has been a hot topic post-9/11. President Obama gave a speech on January 17, 2014 where he stated “in our rush to respond …. , the risk of government overreach – the possibility that we lose some of our core liberties in pursuit of security – also became more pronounced.” (Office of the Press Secretary) Due to the tragic event on September 11th, 2001, our government was placed under extraordinary pressures to find the terrorists and bring them to justice using whatever means possible. This brings around questions regarding ethical dilemmas as they relate to security and our right to privacy.…
Also, the Apple’s privacy argument is all about safeguarding the public safety of all the good people using their products. On the other hand, the Government’s national security argument is that, the true culprits of the San Bernandino case could be brought be caught and brought into light. Explanation:…
America’s Cyber Security is at Risk The FBI is going too far, they are not just trying to get into the San Bernardino shooters phone but they are trying to take control and survey private technology. This case is a lot more than what it seems, this argument is about the privacy of information of the American people. If they create the backdoor to the iPhone it would be the same as a master key to a certain kind of door, and why should they be trusted with that power.…