Hamilton, Matt, and Christopher Gifford. "The War between the FBI and Apple Just Heated up Again." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 22 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
This Article is talking about the government’s most recent beef with encryption. The US government has been bugging Apple for years now to include a backdoor in the encryption used on their devices. After the San Bernardino Shooting, the police were completely incapable of getting into the phones of the shooters. This is due to the strong encryption that Apple has just recently implemented in their devices. Apple refused to unlock the phones for the government, even though they shouldn’t be able to access them anyways due to the fact that the key is not stored with Apple. The government has attempted to convince Apple to make a tool to crack such encryption, and Apple has declined out of fear of such a tool being abused by foreign governments and even the US government itself.
This Issue sort of bothers me because I believe that people are entitled to privacy, even if this sort of issue arises every now and again. As some people may know, encryption is only as strong as its password, I would be willing to bet that these two didn’t choose something incredibly secure. In addition to this, the NSA has computing capabilities fast enough to crack most encryption algorithms in a trivial amount of time. I believe that if the government really wanted to, they could unlock these phones. I think that their motive for not doing so is that they can use this to push legislation to force manufacturers to stop implementing strong encryption, as well as gain the right to legally compel someone to give up their encryption keys if forced to in court. This Is important because it shows that technology has advanced to the point that our privacy can be protected, yet it can yield issues such as interference with criminal investigations.
I thought that although this article was informative, I thought that it could have included a little bit more on the technical details of the investigation. I also thought that the article was a
little brief, and could have elaborated more in certain areas. Nonetheless, It gave the reader a general overview of the issue that is written in plain english.
4 comments:
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-me-ln-apple-vs-fbi-farook-iphone-20160222-story.html
Hamilton, Matt, and Christopher Gifford. "The War between the FBI and Apple Just Heated up Again." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 22 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Aran did a good job of summing up the article while still properly displaying the arguments of both sides of the issue. Authorities need such an encryption key to help with investigations like in the case of the San Bernardino shootings, while Apple maintains legitimate concerns about the repercussions of supplying a government with such a powerful weapon of information. Aran picked a topic that clearly interests him and he provided good personal insight into why he feels this is wrong based off of the article. He also included strong supplementary information.
While Aran’s views were well displayed, he sometimes veered into too much speculation and guessing. Perhaps so more concrete information would have been useful in certain spots. This was also matched with a few lapses in formatting and grammar, especially in the last paragraph which seemed a bit cut off and tacked on to a certain degree.
I found the article interesting because we just talked about this topic in my AP Economics class. I would like to continue to read articles that have this technological link to forensics.
I thought Aran did a great job choosing a relevant article that was very well written. The first aspect of the review that I liked was how Aran conveyed why this article was so important.; it made it much easier to understand what the author was trying to get across. Another aspect of the review that I liked was how Aran organized his review; he highlighted the things that were important and why which also made it even easier to understand the message of the article. And the last aspect of the review that I enjoyed was the actual topic that Aran chose to write about; the topic of the article was very intriguing and made the article very fun to read. Although Aran did a great job on the review... there were some areas that could've been improved. One thing I did not like about the review was that there wasn't as much detail as I was looking for; if Aran had put in a little more detail it would've made the article that much better. Lastly, I thought that if Aran was to give a brief summary at the end of the review explaining why the article relates to our current studies, It would have made it easier to understand why he chose the article. In all, I really enjoyed reading this review and article and learned that phone encryption is a big problem right now in the U.S and can not be overlooked.
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-me-ln-apple-vs-fbi-farook-iphone-20160222-story.html
Hamilton, Matt, and Christopher Gifford. "The War between the FBI and Apple Just Heated up Again." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 22 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
I think he explained very well why the government is angry at apple. He also explained very well how apple doesn't want to use the tool that the government made which will encrypt apple phones because apple thinks the tool can be abused by the government. Another aspect in the review that was well presented was his opinion on the issue and why it would be such a bad idea to let the government encrypt our phones.
To improve this review I would add quotes from the article. I would also expand on more reasons why the government wants to encrypt apple phones.
Overall I think the review was very well done. I learned that the government has new ways to invade our privacy like the tool they wanted to use to encrypt the apple phones.
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-me-ln-apple-vs-fbi-farook-iphone-20160222-story.html
Hamilton, Matt, and Christopher Gifford. "The War between the FBI and Apple Just Heated up Again." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 22 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
The review that Aran wrote of the article, "The War Between the FBI and Apple Just Heated Up Again" was well constructed, and, unlike other topics, he included a strong opinion that is seen throughout his review. He balanced the two sides of the argument between the federal government and Apple, concerning unlocking the iPhones of the two shooters involved in San Bernardino, which could contain evidence regarding the case. Aran included a relatively detailed account of the summary of the article, and he gave enough information in order so that those who had not been aware of this debate could understand the root of it. Lastly, as a reader, I liked how he brought up that the rightful concern of privacy for today's advanced technology also bring up legal issues as he states that privacy "yield issues such as interference with criminal investigations."
Although Aran's review was strong, a quote directly from the article would have given it more depth. Also, at one point, it was difficult to distinguish between what the article had said and his own opinion. If there was a clearer distinction between the two, the review could have held much more strength for readers.
It is amazing how many legal issues arise when people's privacy could possibly be endangered, even if unlocking two specific iPhones could provide specific evidence concerning the shooters who were suspected to be associated with terrorist groups. It is now a debate of privacy vs. evidence for an investigation that included the murder of many people.
Post a Comment