Opening Backdoor for the Government Essay Example

In recent years, the debate on whether or not to open a backdoor for the government agencies to spy on messages and calls has hit many countries. The government has been arguing that terrorists use applications with an end to end encryption security while communicating. On the other hand, the concerned companies insist on the privacy law and policy. The most recent such battle involved the government against the Apple company, requiring a backdoor to access iPhones belonging to arrested or suspected terrorist. Another such debate involved the government and WhatsApp Inc. and other encrypted messaging applications (Schulze, 55). The government needed the company to give law enforcement agencies access to the encrypted messages to monitor terrorists. The government argued that terrorists use these applications to communicate and intercepting such messages would help fight terrorism. However, the government having a backdoor to access such information will invade the people's privacy, which is unacceptable.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In the recent Apple Inc. battle, the government needed a backdoor to access an iPhone that they believed could have important information. On the other hand, giving the government a backdoor could set a negative precedence. Allowing access once would compel other judges to allow access to personal phones, which would leak personal information, thus breaking the privacy policy (Schulze, 56). Communication through these applications is not stored by either the phone company, applications, or the internet. Thus, for a backdoor to access the communicated messages, all messages must be stored, which would see the companies incur more expenses. Billions of people communicate daily using these applications, at times personal and very important information, making any chance of risking their privacy not worthwhile.

Apple or any other company creating a backdoor for the government to access user's information would mean that the whole system has to have a vulnerability. Therefore, foreign agencies, hackers, and the terrorists would also try to take advantage of the backdoor. Knowing that there is a vulnerability to exploit, a hacker will try all they can to take advantage and exploit it. People save all type of information on their phones. They trust their phones with bank account pins and very private personal information that would damage them if found by unauthorized personnel. Banking services, including money withdrawal and money transfer, are done through the mobile application. A backdoor will endanger life, as people depend on phones for daily survival.

Technology has given people many options for communicating. Therefore, creating a vulnerability for the government to access people's information would only motivate the terrorists to invent for or use other means of communication with deeper encryption. The dark web is a good example of an unmonitored way of communicating (Cruickshank). More terrorists will use the unmonitored methods of communications, making the created backdoor vulnerability worthless. The terrorists would then invest in exploiting the vulnerability and increasing occurrences of internet crimes such as cyber bullying (Cruickshank). Therefore, creating a backdoor for law enforcers will only create vulnerability and never serve the intended purpose.

Conclusion

The government has been pushing for a backdoor into phones and access to end to end encryptions to monitor terrorist communication. This has motivated a debate between privacy and safety. The government believes that through accessing messages and personal information will boost fight against terrorists. On the other hand, this will invade privacy and create a vulnerability that will bring more harm than good. Therefore, Apple or other companies should not be forced into creating backdoors for the government to monitor communication.

Works Cited

Cruickshank, P. A View from the CT Foxhole: An Interview with Brian Fishman, Counterterrorism Policy Manager, Facebook.

Schulze, M. (2017). Clipper meets Apple vs. FBI: a comparison of the cryptography discourses from 1993 and 2016. Media and Communication, 5(1), 54-62.