A fascinating legal battle is in full swing south of the border, with the United States government, law enforcement and security agencies on one side, pitted against the world's largest and richest technology providers, led by Apple, Microsoft and Google.
Specifically, the FBI wants Apple to hack into an iPhone 5C used by a man who killed 14 people in California on Dec. 2 in an attack believed to have been influenced by the Islamic State.
Apple, Microsoft and Google are fierce competitors, fighting each other daily for market share, but on this subject they are united. They are not in the business of law enforcement and it is not their job to aid in a criminal investigation. In other words, if the FBI want to hack into an iPhone, they can do it themselves.
The irony is that the U.S. government has been working hard with the same companies to make hardware (computers, servers, phones and tablets), software (programs, apps and interfaces) and communications (voice, texts, emails, video conferencing and so on) more secure.
As numerous investigative journalism projects have uncovered, technology and communications companies secretly gave the U.S. government unfettered access to their data streams for the war on terrorism in the wake of 9/11. It was done in such a clandestine fashion that only a handful of employees even knew what was happening. Years later, when it finally came to light, the U.S. government and its various security and law enforcement agencies weren't just sniffing around foreign-based communications, they were actively listening in on Americans. Put bluntly, the United States was spying on its own citizens without a warrant or any other legal justification for doing so.
The vast scope of this high-tech international spy ring, of which Canada is a part through the Five Eyes network, didn't come fully to light until Edward Snowden released thousands of documents and files he obtained while working for a U.S. defence contractor.
In the days and months after 9/11, federal investigators ran roughshod over communications and tech companies large and small, as an investigation by Frontline showed.
Investigators would show up with documents authorizing them to tap into a company's data network. The documents also forbade company leaders from telling anyone, even their own lawyers, about what was happening, under threat of federal charges for hindering an investigation and even aiding and abetting terrorism.
Now the companies are pushing back.
They also have the high ground on multiple fronts.
Their efforts to tighten security have benefited governments and companies, large and small, anxious to protect their data from hackers and espionage. To now build a secret backdoor entrance to those same products is to invite disaster. The problem with secrets is they have a way of becoming public.
These companies spend billions developing and releasing their products. If the backdoor access were to become known to the public, not only would their product be worthless, that backdoor and how to open it would be visible to the bad guys, too. Furthermore, the corporate identity for the providers of safe and secure electronic devices would be destroyed.
The FBI's insistence that their request is special and would not set a legal precedent is hollow. As The Associated Press has reported, there are actually more than a dozen cases before the courts across the United States where law enforcement is demanding access to the electronic devices of suspects.
The government's case boils down to "you can trust us" and "if you've got nothing to hide, why would you care if we looked?"
The problem is governments have routinely abused that trust throughout history when it comes to dealing with citizens and their personal information. Overzealous law enforcement officers eager to land charges and convictions have seized private data and twisted what they've found to suit their case.
Apple, with support from its major competitors, is right to adamantly battle this case. The FBI should do everything it can, within reason, to bring criminals to justice and protect the public but that doesn't mean police and security groups should be able to enter our electronic devices whenever they see fit. If that's going to be the case, we may as well all get house and car keys cut and drop them off with our names and address at the local detachment.
-- Managing editor Neil Godbout
