When the giant Apple turned on certain forms of encryption by default settings for the iPhone a year ago, and Google also applied the same on Android devices, several brands have picked up a public fight with the government.
Last year, the director of SBI who is known as, James Comey likened the encrypted phone to “a closet which cannot be opened”, full of child pornography, terrorist chatter, as well as the conspiracies to share heroin. Mr. Comey did raise the specter of the FBI, “going dark”, blocked from the interception of the communications of dangerous suspects, even with a warrant.
This year in summer, Apple CEO Tim Cook, at the EPIC champions of Freedom event, fired back on the cryptographic “Backboor” and also demanded by Comey, that the digitally equivalent of a skeleton key which would let the FBI listen in on mathematically garbled conversions. “If you probably put a key under the mat for the cops, the burglar can find it, too” said Cook.
The key under the mat or in the closet are different ways to describe the same thing, but with different priorities.
Are the encoded phones an unassailable closet full of horrors? Or are solidly locked front door which forces the government to use one of its several other tools to find out which exactly is inside?
It has been experienced that Google and Apple’s encryption-oriented policies as well as the marketing strategy has actually pleased privacy advocates, as the encryption of devices should also prevent the surveillance in bulk by the NASA.
Ryan Calo who is current studying law and emerging technology at the University of Wanshington, says“For sure Encryption will interfere with all the required capability to intercept communication on regular basis, as our national intelligence sometimes seems to be doing it domestically”. It has probably been designed, tested with the usability in mind by people with three letters after their name. It is usable and mainstream for the individuals who don’t feel weird about using the same device.
The giant brand apple has in fact Criticized Google and other organizations which are relying on mining communications of the consumers for services, as these services are otherwise free. Because apple makes money primarily by selling up expensive hardware device like the iPhone, and creating privacy-friendly devices which has little business trade-offs than for its opponents.
Apple is the brand which is not in need to analyze the required content of your data to be profitable. But then there is Google’s “Free”, advertising which is supported model and does make the device a lot cheaper.
Oliver Day, says that “Apple is the only organization which will probably get the credit to make the privacy a mainstream topic”, Oliver heads a non-profit security oriented security change.
But at the same time individual will realize that apple is so much expensive what it is impractical to advice the activists to purchase the latest version of the iPhone to secure their communication with iMessage.
Majority of time if compared, Android seems behind in terms of the security features, but individuals today are more interested to visualize the advances in Android privacy technology, as it is the technology which can easily be afforded.