Adhering to a strict interpretation, Data Protection by Design (DPbD) can conflict with the needs of law enforcement in their fight against terrorism and criminality. An illustration of this tension can be found in the case of FBI vs. Apple, where the FBI wants Apple to help bypass security on an iPhone in order to gain access to data. The FBI needs the help of Apple – or third parties – to get such access, for which they might need to create new legal mandates. However, private parties like Apple, may want to design their products in such a way that evading and breaking the security of the system is not possible, as consumers demand secure and privacy friendly devices. This article adds to this debate by posing DPbD as an argument in favor of private parties not to cooperate in making their products less secure and less privacy friendly. This argument is especially relevant when a similar case unfolds in the EU under the new regime of the General Data Protection Regulation in which DPbD is explicitly embedded.
|Number of pages||11|
|Journal||Justitiële verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie|
|Publication status||Published - Jul 2016|
- privacy by design
- data protection by default