Bryce Belshin

AAA
Thesis Statement: But apple is doing the right in challenging the federal court
ruling requiring that it comply. (Line 5)
1. The author argues that the courts order violates the constitution and our nations
laws. In 1977 the Supreme Court said the government could not compel a third party
that is not involved in a crime to assist law enforcement if doing so would place
unreasonable burdens on it. Judge Pyms order requiring Apple to create software to
subvert the security features of an iPhone places just such a burden on the
company.(Line
22)
2. The article points out that developing a code to unlock the iphone not only

weakens the security of all apple devices but if apple writes the code, it could be
asked repeatedly in the future for different cases. requiring it to create software to
bypass a feature that causes the phone to erase its data if 10 incorrect passwords are
entered would set a dangerous precedent and could undermine the security of its
devices...courts could require it to use this software in future investigations or order it to
create new software to fit new needs. (Line 3
3. 3)
4. The author also asserts that it would be very dangerous and harmful for the

government to create back doors or keys to unlock encrypted devices.

Congress would do great harm by requiring such back doors. Criminals and domestic
and foreign intelligence agencies could exploit such features to conduct mass
surveillance and steal national and trade secrets. (Line 70)

I think that this article presents a strong argument of why Apple is justified in
appealing the federal courts order to unlock the iphone that belongs the the San
Bernardino shooter. I think that the first argument is solid. It provides sound evidence
that what the government is asking of apple may be illegal. The second argument is
very valid. The article presents the opposing sides point of view and debunks it with the
second argument. The author also points out that apple would be putting all of their
customers privacy at risk if they create a key to bypass the devices encryption. The 3rd
argument is, in my opinion, the weakest of the three. Although the author is making a
fair point, he does not have sound evidence and much of it seems to be speculation. I
agree with the article, the article educate me and changed my opinion on the matter.

SAT Words
1. Subvert- to undermine the power and authority of an established system
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

or institution.
Precedent- An earlier event that is regarded as an example for a future
event with similar circumstances.
Prevail- To prove you are more powerful than an opposing force.
Proliferation- A rapid increase in numbers.
Encrypt- A code to prevent unauthorized access to something.
Undermine- To seriously damage or weaken something or someone.

Reflection
I think that this article underlines a very important issue, security vs. privacy.
Apple is one of the leaders in the tech industry for private devices. What happens to
them will set an example for all of the other companys. Personally I am very torn on this
issue, I believe that both security and privacy are important and should be balanced. I
don't completely agree with the article but I think that it raises some very valid points. I
think that this article was pretty easy for me to understand, although there was a high
number of difficult words I had to look up. I am looking forward to the socratic seminar
and hearing everybody's opinions.