Data protection by design als argument in het FBI vs. Appledebat

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

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.
Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)37-47
Number of pages11
JournalJustitiële verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2016

Keywords

  • privacy by design
  • data protection by default
  • EU
  • USA
  • GDPR
  • privacy

Cite this

@article{f17301f6a8a7459d8f6478214c866a54,
title = "Data protection by design als argument in het FBI vs. Appledebat",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "privacy by design, data protection by default, EU, USA, GDPR, privacy",
author = "{van Schendel}, Sascha and Colette Cuijpers",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
language = "Dutch",
pages = "37--47",
journal = "Justiti{\"e}le verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie",
issn = "0167-5850",
number = "3",

}

Data protection by design als argument in het FBI vs. Appledebat. / van Schendel, Sascha; Cuijpers, Colette.

In: Justitiële verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie, No. 3, 07.2016, p. 37-47.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Data protection by design als argument in het FBI vs. Appledebat

AU - van Schendel, Sascha

AU - Cuijpers, Colette

PY - 2016/7

Y1 - 2016/7

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - privacy by design

KW - data protection by default

KW - EU

KW - USA

KW - GDPR

KW - privacy

M3 - Article

SP - 37

EP - 47

JO - Justitiële verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie

JF - Justitiële verkenningen: Documentatieblad van het Ministerie van Justitie

SN - 0167-5850

IS - 3

ER -