Is Privacy More Important Than Security??

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” – Benjamin Franklin

Terrorism and Privacy in the Digital Age:

Being alive in our present state of computer technology is very exciting. It also presents new ethical issues surrounding the use of technology and our right to privacy. Case in point; the San Bernardino husband and wife who opened fire killing 14 students and school administration in a special education facility in California this past December. The husband and wife team claimed terrorist connections and both suspects destroyed their iPhones before they were killed by authorities. The debate on privacy vs. security stems from the male suspect, Syed Farook, who had a work iPhone that was confiscated by authorities and a federal court ordered software company Apple to hack into the accused terrorists' work cell to obtain information. So far, Apple has refused to cooperate with this court order.

So what does this mean for privacy vs. security in our digital age? The article from USA Today, dated February 20, 2016 "The terrorist's iPhone: Our view" http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/18/apple-court-order-iphone-fbi-syed-farook-editorials-debates/80572492/ raised this and other questions. Is Apple responsible for creating software that can be hacked into for federal crimes and investigations? What would this mean for Apple as far as consumers being able to trust that their information cannot be hacked by entities outside of Apple? Is it the duty of Apple to concede with the federal government or side with the consumers for their privacy? 

My initial gut answer to this situation was to side with Apple software. I felt Apple owed it to the consumer to protect their information, somewhat like a doctor / patient confidentiality agreement. However, even in a doctor / patient confidentiality agreement, there is a disclaimer that says medical records can be subpoenaed by the courts. What makes this situation between Apple and the federal government any different?

Perhaps there is some comprise that can be created and the editorial article did make mention of this when it stated “The best outcome to this showdown might be a compromise that keeps a single-use-only key confined to Apple's headquarters, combined with legislation that limits government access to extraordinary scenarios in which lives are at stake”. This compromise makes sense, it seems reasonable and rational. Not only does it respect the business ethics of Apple software, but it allows for the government to investigate when crimes this heinous are committed. It seems in this day and age privacy may have to take a back seat to safety.