![]() ![]() Though it was difficult for him to resist orders from the US government, and he knew he’d face backlash, he needed to take a stand. “We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack,” he wrote. He believed the FBI’s intentions were good, but it was his responsibility to protect Apple users. The government could then demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept messages, access health records or financial data, or track users’ locations. from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals.” It would be a slippery slope from there. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.”Ĭook then accused the government of trying to force Apple “to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers. “The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. a backdoor to the iPhone.” He continued, “In the wrong hands, this software-which does not exist today-would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.” This could have potentially disastrous consequences, leaving users powerless to stop any unwanted invasion of privacy. “But now the US government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. “If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data.”Īpple had been working with the FBI to try to unlock the phone, providing data and making engineers available, Cook explained. He had to show the world that he was advocating for user privacy rather than supporting terrorism.Īt 4:30 a.m., just in time for the morning news cycle on the East Coast, Cook published an open letter to Apple customers explaining why the company would be opposing the ruling, which “threatens the security of our customers.” He referenced the danger that could come from the government having too much power: “The implications of the government’s demands are chilling,” he wrote. This was brand-new territory, and Cook had to figure out how to navigate it. This case put the company unexpectedly on the side of a terrorist. What kind of company wouldn’t help the FBI in a terrorist investigation? From a public relations standpoint, Apple had always been on the side of privacy advocates and civil libertarians. The stock is down just 1% today, along with the broader market, so it seems that Wall Street approves of Apple's shift too.Cook was very concerned about the public’s reaction and knew that one of the outcomes of his action could be that Apple would be accused of siding with terrorists. It's actually a pretty humble message, with Tim Cook fully aware that now all eyes are on him. Sounds like a piece that comes from the heart, and the guy certainly seems both proud and grateful to work for "the most innovative company in the world", greasing the employees ego. I am confident our best years lie ahead of us and that together we will continue to make Apple the magical place that it is. All of the incredible support from the Board, the executive team and many of you has been inspiring. I love Apple and I am looking forward to diving into my new role. We are going to continue to make the best products in the world that delight our customers and make our employees incredibly proud of what they do. ![]() Steve built a company and culture that is unlike any other in the world and we are going to stay true to that-it is in our DNA. I cherish and celebrate Apple's unique principles and values. I want you to be confident that Apple is not going to change. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |