People gather at a small rally in support of Apple''s refusal to help the FBI access the cell phone of a gunman involved in the killings of 14 people in San Bernardino, in Santa Monica

Violating privacy or fighting ‘terrorism’?

The war of words between Apple and the FBI over the encryption of a shooter’s smartphone is escalating.

It is a public battle that goes to the heart of a very big debate. How much power should law enforcement and intelligence officials have to monitor our digital communications?

On one side, the US Justice Department and the FBI. On the other, tech giant Apple, which is refusing to make software to unlock one of its iPhones.

Keep reading

First pig kidney in a human: Is this the future of transplants?

Hong Kong’s first monkey virus case – what do we know about the B virus?

Why will low birthrate in Europe trigger ‘Staggering social change’?

The Max Planck Society must end its unconditional support for Israel

The device in question was used by one of the San Bernardino attackers. And the FBI says it needs to be unlocked so it can carry out a full investigation.

But for Apple, it is about much more than a single phone. It is about the security of hundreds of millions of people’s private communications.

And a precedent that could threaten civil liberties.

So, who is the real defender of the people in this story, Apple or the FBI?

Presenter: Mike Hanna

Guests:

Dean Crutchfield – brand adviser and strategist for the Dean Crutchfield company.

Gary Miliefsky – co-founder and CEO of SnoopWall, a mobile device security company.

Aral Balkan – founder and chief lead designer of Indie.