San Bernadino

As I said in the opening round, I was just polling. But that's on me for not locking the debate to acceptance, so I'll continue. Second, to Micheal, on debate. org, the first round is only for rules and whatnot so there never supposed to be arguments during that round. But let's continue anyways. Contention 1 - What is the Investigational value of the phone? In order for us to decide whether or not Apple should comply with the court order we have to make a cost-benefit analysis: what do we win and what do we lose by complying with the court order? In this contention I'll argue that Syed Farook's Iphone will most likely have no effect on the investigation. If the phone will have no effect on the investigation there is no reason to comply with the court order. If Pro doesn't prove a substantiative reason that unlocking this Iphone is key to solving the investigation, there is no reason to vote for him. This is especially true because pro has full burden of proof. He has the burden of proof becuase he is advocating an action. For example, if Pro said, "we should get a new fridge" he should be required to give a reason, such as "because ours is broken. " If his bop is unfulfilled, he shouldn't win the debate, or in other words, if the fridge isn't broken there isn't a reason to buy another one. One of the first things we should note is Syed Farook's level of planning. He took many measures to cover his tracks and wasn't reckless in anyway. For instance, of Syed Farook's three phones, he destroyed two of them. The ones he destroyed were his personal phones. The one he didn't destroy was his WORK phone, because doing so would be suspicious. The FBI now has this Iphone and wants access to it but it is, of course, locked. Because it was his work phone he wasn't using it for terrorist activities which effectively means there will be NO useful information on it. Even the police agree, just read what Chief Burguan of the San Bernadion police department said: "I'll be honest with you. .. there is probably nothing of any value on the phone. "[1]But if this phone is not integral to the case then why is the FBI pressing so hard to get into it? It all comes down to state power and the emergence of a surveillance state in America. The executive branch is using this tragic attack for political and power oreniented ends. The current court order tells Apple to reengineer their software so that the FBI can run an infinite number of passcodes until they guess the correct one. Apple has rightly asserted that this is the equivelant of a backdoor, or a software vulnerability which allows encryption standards to be circumvented. This particular backdoor would give the government unlimited access to all Iphones and even worse, it would set a legal and international precedent that it's OK to turn cooperations into massive surveillance machines. The White House has publicly stated they are not requesting any software that would allow an all-encompassing backdoor to Iphones but there is simply No Way to create what they want Without create a backdoor. How is Apple supposed create a key that only works on one door, when every other door has the exact same lock? Its simply impossible. Contention 2: Setting a legal precedent One thing we must make clear is that Apple has been extremely helpful in assisting the law with not only the San Bernadino shootings, but with other cases as well. Apple has already given the FBI all of the Icloud backup data it could find for Syed's phones and has helped the government with other Iphones in over 80 cases. This time is different however because the government's request will lead to an extreme violation of privacy around the world. Apple is genuinely looking out for the interests of the nation and the entire world here. If Apple is forced to comply with the court order, the government will use this case to justify forcing other companies to create backdoors into their software. Furthermore, governments like Russia and China are just itching to hear that the US has justified creating backdoors into coorperate software. The United States sets the example for the rest of the world, so whatever we do everyone else will follow. Once the U. S. justifies this type of action, other nations will soon force Apple to do the same in their countries, giving governments like China Access to American information. This case is pivital, there will be a domino effect where losing this battle means allowing backdoors all over the world. It would justify an unlimited amount of surveillance globablly. But let's say other nations don't follow suit, even then we have the problem of hackers getting access to the break-in software. The skelleton key the government wants will get out and be exploited by both government and individual hackers or terrorists. This means complying with the court order will ironically create and enable crime, terrorism, and surveillance on a massive scale. So let's explore the harms of backdoors. Contention 3: Cyberterrorism and hackingEven secret backdoors will be found and exploited for cyberattacks: by Eric Burger, Research Professor of Computer Science at Georgetown University, 2014"Creating a backdoor introduces the risk that other parties will find the vulnerability, especially when capable adversaries, who are actively seeking security vulnerabilities, know how to leverage such weaknesses. History illustrates that secret backdoors do not remain secret. .. One example occurred in Greece. Switches came equipped with built-in wiretapping features, intended only for authorized law enforcement agencies. Some unknown attacker made use of these and eavesdrop[ed] on calls from many cell phones — including the Prime Minister of Greece, a hundred high-ranking Greek dignitaries, and an employee of the U. S. Embassy. In essence, a backdoor created to fight crime was used to commit crime. "[2]Backdoors on phones are used for cyberattacks: Connor-Simons, Communications Coordinator at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), 2015"special access in complex systems like smartphones would create vulnerable “single points of failure” that would be particularly attractive targets for hackers, cybercrime groups, and other countries. Any attacker who could break into the system that stores the security credentials would instantly gain access to all of the data, thereby putting potentially millions of users at risk. "[3]Terrorists and criminals will use backdoors on phones to enable catastrophic cyberattacks: Steven Bucci, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, 2009"Unless we get cyber crime under control, it will mutate into a very real, very dangerous national security issue with potentially catastrophic ramifications. It would be far better to address it now rather than in the midst of a terrorist incident or campaign of incidents against one of our countries. Terrorism enabled by cyber criminals is our most likely major cyber threat. "[4]Terrorists and cybercriminals could use backdoors on phones to attack critical infrastructure: Thomas Overton, 2015"hackers could covertly and systematically disable safety systems which would usually protect the generators from desynchronisation events. They send control signals which open and close the generator’s rotating circuit breakers in quick succession, using the inertia of the generator itself to force the phase angle between supply and load out of sync. .. The result would be a blackout affecting 93 million people in 15 northeastern states and the District of Colombia. many areas, such as New York City, would suffer intermittent blackouts for weeks afterward, resulting in widespread social unrest and disruptions. Economic costs could reach as high as $223 billion, with the overall damage to the U. S. economy as much as $1 trillion in the worst-case scenario. [5] Citations[1] . http://www.macobserver.com...[2] . http://papers.ssrn.com...[3] . http://newsoffice.mit.edu...[4] . http://www.heritage.org...[5] . http://www.powermag.com...