As of recently, encryption has become a largely debated topic. Within the last few months, large corporations like Google and Apple have made their devices fully encrypted so that only the user can be the one to unlock the encryption. Encryption has come under scrutiny from the government because with encryption it makes it more difficult for the government to monitor terrorism and to solve crimes.
Encryption needs to go, it provides a safe haven for criminal activity that can be hidden from government agencies who can prevent these crimes from happening. Encryption can provide a major barrier in solving crimes because of the passwords that large corporations aren't able to retrieve. Large companies which include Apple and Google, have placed
…show more content…
Source B argues that encryption prevents crimes from being solved, which includes a father of six who was shot dead and the killer is now on the run (Source B). The article describes that there were two smartphones, one phone running on Apple’s operating system, and one on google’s Operating system. These phones seem to hold the answer to the crimes, but they can not be unlocked because the phones have been encrypted so not even the companies can unlock them. By having these phones encrypted, this could lead to this crime not being able to be solved and six kids not knowing who killed their father. Encryption adds an extra, very difficult, step that hinders the government's ability to be able solve crimes quickly and efficiently. Without encryption, the police could have looked for evidence on the phones and possibly could have solved the crimes and put the man who did this away so that his family could have closure. Encryption not only not only hinders the solving of murders, it also hinders the …show more content…
Yes, you have your right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment, but if the government can do something to ensure your safety, then that needs to happen. A “full-key” encryption would grant more privacy then we would need, allowing more crime to happen because now the government can’t see as much as they used too. Terrorists are becoming more and more tech savvy and now using it more than ever to communicate across countries to commit acts of terror. Source B supports this claim by “In France, smartphone data was vital to the swift investigation of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in January.(Source B)” This source describes that if it wasn’t for the data on the smartphones, this case may not have been solved and people may never know who had committed this attack. If the smartphone was “full-key” encrypted, then the evidence on the phone may have never been retrievable to solve who had done this attack. By encrypting smartphones, terror groups including ISIS, could hide many of their activities so that when we find out about them, it would be too late for the governments to stop
Privacy comes at a cost. It brings people who fight for the people the privacy of others when it is violated together. Cops not being able to search when they seize a cell phone makes them risk their lives because how people these days are, there could be bombs in the phone. Even though this amendment was ratified, people to this day still don’t have privacy they rightfully deserve. This effects me because I’m able to keep special information to myself. Also, if a police pulls over a family member and ask for their phone to investigate without giving a proper reason or having a warrant, that family member could say no. If a police hasn’t given you a good reason to hand something over, you have the right to resist or else the police are being unconstitutional. This amendment gives people the safety to do what they want(that’s legal). It also makes life better, but harder. Life is harder with this amendment because you have to watch out for who you trust that they won’t do anything to jeopardize your safety. This is relevant because a man in Indiana was tracked down by a GPS. It didn’t violate his 4th Amendment because the police got a warrant to put a tracking device in his mom’s car. This case represents how technology gives advantages and disadvantages. An advantage was that they were able to track him down for a burglary. The disadvantage would be that if they hadn’t gotten a warrant, he could have filed a lawsuit against
Should Apple be forced to unlock an iPhone or not? It becomes a controversial topic during these years. Most people are concerned with their privacy and security. Darrell Issa is a congressman and has served the government since 2001. Recently, he published “Forcing Apple to Hack That iPhone Sets a Dangerous Precedent” in Wired Magazine, to persuade those governors worked in the Congress. It is easier to catch administrators’ attention because some of them want to force Apple to unlock the iPhone. Darrel Issa focuses on governors because he thinks they can support the law to make sure that everyone has privacy. He addresses the truth that even some of the governors force Apple to hack iPhones when they need people’s information. He considers maintaining people’s privacy as the primary purpose. He also insists that Apple should not be forced to use their information which could lead people’s safety. In “Forcing Apple to Hack That iPhone Sets a Dangerous Precedent,” Darrell Issa uses statistics and historical evidence to effectively persuade his audience of governors that they need to consider whether or not Apple should be forced to hack or not because it could bring people to a dangerous situation and forget the purpose of keeping people’s privacy.
What is encryption? Encryption is a technological technique that protects and secures the transfer of plain text information between two sources through the use of the internet. This is done by rearranging the text using a mathematical algorithm that renovates the message into an indecipherable form, which can only be unlocked and translated with a use of a key. The strength of the encryption key is measured by its length, which is determined by the number of bits and by the type of encryption program.
In today 's generation many adults and teenagers keep everything from contacts numbers to their social security numbers on their smartphones. When customers, including criminals and terrorists purchase their smartphones, they are buying it with the assurance that not some, but all of their information and privacy will be safeguarded. The issue occurring today deals with the suspected terrorist of the San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015 shooting involving over 30 injured people. Syed Farook, the suspected terrorist Apple IPhone is locked with a 4 code password and the government wants Apple to create a backdoor operating systems that allows them to computerize as many passcodes they can to unlocks the terrorists IPhone. Apple strongly believes that creating this necessary backdoor system will create a negative chain of effects that will affect everyone from smartphone users to social media companies and their privacy. The FBI recently has taken Apple to court to create the necessary backdoor operating systems to get around the security features created on the Apple IPhones. Apple has the legal right to refuse creating a “backdoor” software to get into suspected terrorists iphone because it invades the privacy of Apple 's customers, it will set a precedent for other companies, and the FBI will mislead Apple.
Lye, L. (2013). Keeping cell phones private. If the police have a good reason to search a phone, then they can get a warrant, Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/09/16/warrantless-cell-phone-searches-violate-civil-liberties
As of today police officers are required to get a warrant to search any kind of property of the individual being arrested. These warrants require probable cause for the search of specific properties issued by an impartial judge. Those rights are protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Over the years, the United States Court has made exceptions to these requirements, which essentially allow the police to search certain types of property without a warrant and infuriating a lot of citizens. One of the big conflicts that citizens and officers are facing is case of Cellphones and smart phones, until now, the Court had not addressed whether this fit into an exceptions. I strongly believe that the rights of citizens should be preserved and a warrant must be issued in order to go through any information on any kind of phones.
They are a useful tool for “tattletexting” (Reilly 1). People use their phones as a way of snitching on people instead of walking to security themselves. Now this serves a useful purpose. For example if you were at a sports event, like in source C, and if by the time you walked all the way to security and back the rude fan who had been spitting on everyone heard you were getting security and left. With the use of the phone, a spectator can text security and security can point a camera to see if there telling the truth.
In the American constitution the fourth amendment reads as follows; The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. The fourth amendment protects personal privacy and every citizen’s right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their homes, businesses, and personal lives. However, when the fourth amendment was written by America’s founders, the world was a very different place with limited technology. The amendment does not specifically cover telephones or computers leaving the issue up to the courts. There have been recent articles about warrantless wiretapping in the name of national security against terrorism.
The implications of the government’s wants are frightening. They need new regulations that would make their work easier and faster. Problem at moment is that if the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, then FBI can easily just arrest and block all your information you had in your mobile or follow your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without you even knowing about it. [12]
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place.”(“5 Myths about Privacy”)
As technology as advanced, so has our society. We are able to accomplish many tasks much easier, faster, and in effective ways. However, if looked at the harmful impact it has had on the society, one can realize that these are severe and really negative. One of the main concerns is privacy rights. Many people want that their information and personal data be kept in secrecy, however with today’s technology, privacy is almost impossible. No matter how hard one tries, information being leaked through technological advancements have become more and more common. With personal information being leaked, one does not know exactly how the information will be used, which validates the statement that privacy rights have been diminishing and should be brought to concern. Many people do not realize that their information is being used by third-parties and to consumer companies. In conclusion, technology has had a significant effect on privacy
Privacy is a right granted to all American citizens in the Fourth Amendment which states “people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and lives against unreasonable search and seizures”. Although our founding fathers could have never predicted the technological advancements we have achieved today, it would be logical to assume that a person's internet and phone data would be considered their effects. This would then make actions such as secretive government surveillance illegal because the surveillance is done so without probable cause and would be considered unreasonable search or seizure. Therefore, access to a citizen’s private information should only be provided using probable cause with the knowledge and consent of those who are being investigated.
One advantage of having a cell phone is that it’s very helpful when a person needs to contact a friend or a family member (9). For example, when someone is lost in a place they have never been to. But nowadays people owning a cell phone can never get lost because now phones have a map that tells you where your location is. Now a phone can also be a credit/debit card swiper for someone's business. Another good advantage of having a cell phone is that if someone is a witness of a crime being committed, that person can make a call to the police and try to get the person committing the crime off the streets (9)....
The length of the key for the encryption can vary from being very short to extremely long, and the length of the message being encrypted. The protection of data being transferred between ATMs and the bank, and the use of cell phones, is the most common everyday encounter with encryption. To encrypt and decrypt information, a cipher is used. In a cipher, there is a set of well-defined steps that can be followed to encrypt and decrypt messages.
In this era when the Internet provides essential communication between tens of millions of people and is being increasingly used as a tool for security becomes a tremendously important issue to deal with, So it is important to deal with it. There are many aspects to security and many applications, ranging from secure commerce and payments to private communications and protecting passwords. One essential aspect for secure communications is that of cryptography. But it is important to note that while cryptography is necessary for secure communications, it is not by itself sufficient. Cryptography is the science of writing in secret code and is an ancient art; In the old age people use to send encoded message which can be understand by the receiver only who know the symbolic and relative meaning of that encoded message .The first documented use of cryptography in writing dates back to circa 1900 B.C. Egyptian scribe used non-standard hieroglyphs in an inscription. After writing was invented cryptography appeared spontaneously with applications ranging from diplomatic missives to war-time battle plans. It is no surprise, then, that new forms of cryptography came soon after the widespread development of computer communications. In telecommunications and data cryptography is necessary when communicating in any untrusted medium, which includes any network, particularly the Internet [1].Within the context of any application-to-application communication, there are some security requirements, including: