Retired General Michael Hayden, former head of both the NSA and CIA, told USA Today that while he “trends toward the government” on the ‘master key‘ approach to the San Bernardino case, he thinks Apple is right that there should never be a back door to encryption. His remarks were made as Tim Cook called for the government to drop its demands that Apple help the FBI break into an iPhone.
Hayden went so far as to specifically call out FBI Director Jim Comey in his comments.
In this specific case, I’m trending toward the government, but I’ve got to tell you in general I oppose the government’s effort, personified by FBI Director Jim Comey. Jim would like a back door available to American law enforcement in all devices globally. And, frankly, I think on balance that actually harms American safety and security, even though it might make Jim’s job a bit easier in some specific circumstances.
Comey has repeatedly attacked Apple’s use of strong encryption on iPhones …
Hayden said that while he would have loved a back door into encrypted devices while he was running the NSA, the problem – as I argued – is that others would inevitably gain access to it.
“When you step back and look at the whole question of American security and safety writ large, we are a safer, more secure nation without back doors,” he says. With them, “a lot of other people would take advantage of it.”
Hayden said that there were, though, no easy answers.
What we’re trying to do here is what free people and this free people have done since the inception of the republic, which is to balance two things, both of which are virtues: our security and our privacy. There are no permanent answers to that. We debate them continuously based on the totality of circumstances in which we find ourselves. The point I make to our countrymen: This is not a struggle between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. This is a good people, trying to find the right balance.
Lest anyone think Hayden has gone soft in his retirement, he had uncompromising things to say about everything from waterboarding (justified to get information to protect America) to the NSA’s mass surveillance of phone records (the NSA should have been a bit more open about it, but people over-reacted).
The entire piece – including Hayden’s assessment of current Presidential candidates – is well worth a read.
Photo: FPA
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
I think the bigger issue is who owns the publishing right for the book on this story¡
This guy was a snake then and he’s a snake now.
Today its an iPhone
Tomorrow will it be Firewalls?
HTTPS connections?
Secure Databases?
Encrypted transmissions?
TOR?
Encrypted backup drives?
Hell, a “terrorist” might be hiding in your smart thermostat or internet connected refrigerator. It never ends.
Hayden is right. The government is trying to do something it should never have even considered. This is wrong by any and all measure.
Couldn’t agree more. Very well said. Can’t wait until the day they want to begin monitoring our smart thermostats.
Well . . . Nest is owned by Google . . . . So, they may already be doing that! ;)
Did he talk about the time he lied to Congress?
Which time? He could talk for hours and hours on those lies!
That is why this is so significant. He has a history of doing whatever he thought necessary by any means necessary.
He has lied to congress, violated national and international rules in order to achieve his end: “protect the US”. For him to come out now and say this is a step too far and in the wrong direction has a lot of weight.
Perhaps because he’s now a “Private Citizen” again?
Or it means there’s an angle to this we’re not privy to. Maybe he believes the FBI winning this case will harm or bring attention to a larger issue.
Hayden was on the CBS Sunday Morning show yesterday – it’s worth looking in on when it’s posted on the CBS web site – and he was very un-aplogetic about his days as both the NSA and CIA head, when asked about hacking into foreign governments web sites. I found it very interesting that he would take this particular tact – that is until he said that the NSA never did it to US Citizens as the NSA wasn’t allowed to by law! Guess he’s not read the Snowden papers or he doesn’t believe them.
Putting that particular lie aside, he did speak about all the state sponsored government hacking that goes on in the world today. I (mostly) found his candor refreshing, but was still left with what he didn’t say. Still – worth a view, IMO.
They’re not good people. Their job is enforcing law, not protecting people or ethics or freedom. If the books say “to hell with you”, then that’s where you’re going. You can’t be good and pursue gross abstractions of control and laws of any type, which are defined as force, which is violence.
The only persuasive argument I think I would consider is (correct me if I’ve been lied to…) that the phone in question is owned by San Bernardino. The shooter’s personal phone was destroyed. The owner of the phone (San Bernardino) is making this request (through the FBI).
But the counter argument is still the same and more persuasive – if Apple can demonstrate an ability to circumvent their own technology, despite saying they can’t, then it’s simply a slippery slope. One request after another until the more prudent measure is to include a back-door.
Found it:
articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-09-29/news/8703130428_1_privacy-judge-bork-protect
Failed Supreme Court Nominee Judge Bork’s views on Privacy are very telling. Especially after his rejection by congress, from both sides of the aisle. “Being Borked” has become a catch phrase among the right wing for getting rejected for only political reasons. But they were not political. Bork, the darling of the Conservative movement, stated that he did not feel the constitution had any guarantee of a right to privacy. None. This despite opinions from many law professors and others stating that not only was there a right to privacy, that every part of the Bill of Rights was grounded in a right to privacy.
The people who idolize Bork were the students and clerks when Bork was around. They are now the people at the top of government trying to break Apple.
If you’d like to support Apple’s stance on privacy, there is a White House petition at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/apple-privacy-petition
#WeStandWithApple
Or do something more meaningful than signing an online petition like putting pen to paper and writing your member of the House of Reps and Senator. Also follow-up with a call to their local and office in D.C. I’m not saying it will do any good, but it holds a lot more weight than an online petition..
If one hardware manufacturer is compelled to doctor its product than any hardware manufacturer could be compelled to do the same thing.
For instance, auto manufacturers. In Oklahoma State, a mentally ill woman killed four people and injured 40 by plowing her car into a parade. Why not put a remote control kill switch in cars.
For gun manufacturers, many now have fingerprint guards. Those could be altered to determine number of bullets fired or caused to be locked and rendered useless. Or there could be remote control barrel constrictors to disable a gun.
Of course, the police (FBI) is going to ask for all of the tools it can think of. But we have to be adults here, if we give police everything they want there’s a word for that, it’s called a Police State.
In the San Bernadino specific case, the most appalling fact is that they want an electronic means of inputting pass codes. Why not make this field portable and not require a warrant. That would be convenient.
I agree with Tim Cook this is a very slippery slope to require disabling security features and fundamentally altering products.
One last point, remember the heat Apple got for the Fappening, that is one of the reasons why they hardened encryption.