In the spring of 2016, a legal battle between Apple and the Federal Bureau of Investigation captured the world's attention.
U proljeće 2016, pravna borba između Applea i FBI-a zapela je svijetu za oko.
Apple has built security features into its mobile products which protect data on its devices from everyone but the owner. That means that criminals, hackers and yes, even governments are all locked out. For Apple's customers, this is a great thing. But governments are not so happy. You see, Apple has made a conscious decision to get out of the surveillance business. Apple has tried to make surveillance as difficult as possible for governments and any other actors.
Apple je ugradio sigurnosne postavke u svoje mobilne proizvode koje štite podatke na svojim uređajima od svakog osim vlasnika. To znači da su kriminalci, hakeri i da, čak i vlade bez pristupa. Za Appleove korisnike to je odlična stvar. Ali vlade nisu baš sretne. Vidite, Apple je napravio svjesnu odluku da bude izvan nadzora. Apple je pokušao otežati nadzor što je više moguće vladama i bilo kome drugome.
There are really two smartphone operating systems in the global smartphone market: iOS and Android. iOS is made by Apple. Android is made by Google. Apple has spent a lot of time and money to make sure that its products are as secure as possible. Apple encrypts all data stored on iPhones by default, and text messages sent from one Apple customer to another Apple customer are encrypted by default without the user having to take any actions.
Postoje dva operativna sustava na svjetskom tržištu pametnih telefona: iOS i Android. iOS je stvorio Apple. Android je stvorio Google. Apple je potrošio mnogo vremena i novca kako bi se osigurao da njihovi proizvodi budu što sigurniji. Apple automatski enkriptira sve podatke uskladištene na iPhoneu, a tekstualne poruke poslane od jednog do drugog Apple korisnika enkriptirane su automatski, bez da korisnik mora bilo što poduzeti.
What this means is that, if the police seize an iPhone and it has a password, they'll have a difficult time getting any data off of it, if they can do it at all. In contrast, the security of Android just really isn't as good. Android phones, or at least most of the Android phones that have been sold to consumers, do not encrypt data stored on the device by default, and the built-in text messaging app in Android does not use encryption. So if the police seize an Android phone, chances are, they'll be able to get all the data they want off of that device.
To znači da, ako policija zaplijeni iPhone koji ima šifru, teško će doći do ikakvih podataka s njega, ako to uopće i mogu učiniti. Nasuprot tome, sigurnost Androida jednostavno nije tako dobra. Android telefoni, ili bar većina njih, koji su prodani korisnicima, ne enkriptiraju automatski podatke pohranjene na uređaju, a aplikacija za slanje poruka na Androidu ne koristi enkripciju. Tako da ako policija zaplijeni Android telefon, velike su šanse da će moći dobiti sve željene podatke s tog uređaja.
Two smartphones from two of the biggest companies in the world; one that protects data by default, and one that doesn't.
Dva pametna telefona od dvije najveće kompanije svijeta; jedna koja automatski štiti podatke i druga koja to ne čini.
Apple is a seller of luxury goods. It dominates the high end of the market. And we would expect a manufacturer of luxury goods to have products that include more features. But not everyone can afford an iPhone. That's where Android really, really dominates: at the middle and low end of the market, smartphones for the billion and a half people who cannot or will not spend 600 dollars on a phone.
Apple prodaje luksuzne proizvode. On dominira na tržištu visoke kupovne moći. A od proizvođača luksuznih dobara bismo očekivali da njegovi proizvodi uključuju više odlika. Ali ne mogu svi sebi priuštiti iPhone. Tu Android zaista dominira, na srednjem i nižem dijelu tržišta, pametni telefoni za milijardu i pol ljudi koji ne mogu ili ne žele potrošiti 600 dolara na telefon.
But the dominance of Android has led to what I call the "digital security divide." That is, there is now increasingly a gap between the privacy and security of the rich, who can afford devices that secure their data by default, and of the poor, whose devices do very little to protect them by default.
Ali, dominacija Androida je dovela do nečega što ja zovem "podjela digitalne sigurnosti." To jest, sada je sve veći jaz između privatnosti i sigurnosti bogatih, koji si mogu priuštiti uređaje koji štite njihove podatke, i siromašnih, čiji uređaji rade vrlo malo na automatskoj zaštiti.
So, think of the average Apple customer: a banker, a lawyer, a doctor, a politician. These individuals now increasingly have smartphones in their pockets that encrypt their calls, their text messages, all the data on the device, without them doing really anything to secure their information. In contrast, the poor and the most vulnerable in our societies are using devices that leave them completely vulnerable to surveillance.
Zamislite prosječnog korisnika Appleovih proizvoda: bankara, odvjetnika, liječnika, političara. Te osobe sada sve više imaju u svojim džepovima telefone, koji enkriptiraju njihove pozive, njihove tekstualne poruke, sve te podatke na uređaju, bez da oni učine išta za zaštitu svojih informacija. Nasuprot tome, siromašni i najranjiviji u našim društvima koriste uređaje zbog kojih su potpuno osjetljivi na nadzor.
In the United States, where I live, African-Americans are more likely to be seen as suspicious or more likely to be profiled, and are more likely to be targeted by the state with surveillance. But African-Americans are also disproportionately likely to use Android devices that do nothing at all to protect them from that surveillance. This is a problem.
U Sjedinjenim Državama, gdje živim, Afro-Amerikance će češće gledati kao sumnjive, ili će ih češće provjeravati, i vjerojatnije je da će biti meta nadzora države. Ali mnogo je vjerojatnije da će Afro-Amerikanci koristiti Android uređaje koji ne poduzimaju baš ništa kako bi ih zaštitili od nadzora. To je problem.
We must remember that surveillance is a tool. It's a tool used by those in power against those who have no power. And while I think it's absolutely great that companies like Apple are making it easy for people to encrypt, if the only people who can protect themselves from the gaze of the government are the rich and powerful, that's a problem. And it's not just a privacy or a cybersecurity problem. It's a civil rights problem.
Moramo se sjetiti da je nadzor alat. To je alat kojeg koriste moćni protiv onih koji nemaju moć. I dok mislim da je odlično što kompanije poput Applea olakšavaju ljudima enkripciju, ako su jedini ljudi koji se mogu zaštititi od pogleda vlade bogati i moćni, to je problem. A to nije samo problem privatnosti ili cyber sigurnosti. To je problem građanskih prava.
So the lack of default security in Android is not just a problem for the poor and vulnerable users who are depending on these devices. This is actually a problem for our democracy. I'll explain what I mean.
Tako da nedostatak automatske zaštite na Androidu nije samo problem za siromašne i nezaštićene korisnike koji ovise o ovim uređajima. To je, zapravo, problem za našu demokraciju. Objasnit ću što time mislim.
Modern social movements rely on technology -- from Black Lives Matter to the Arab Spring to Occupy Wall Street. The organizers of these movements and the members of these movements increasingly communicate and coordinate with smartphones. And so, naturally governments that feel threatened by these movements will also target the organizers and their smartphones. Now, it's quite possible that a future Martin Luther King or a Mandela or a Gandhi will have an iPhone and be protected from government surveillance. But chances are, they'll probably have a cheap, $20 Android phone in their pocket.
Moderni društveni pokreti se oslanjaju na tehnologiju od Black Lives Matter do Arapskog proljeća te Occupy Wall Street. Organizatori i članovi ovih pokreta sve više komuniciraju i koordiniraju se uz pomoć pametnih telefona. I tako, vlade koje se osjećaju ugroženo od strane tih pokreta također će ciljati organizatore i njihove pametne telefone. Vrlo je moguće da će budući Martin Luther King, Mandela ili Gandhi imati iPhone i biti zaštićeni od nadzora vlade. Ali vjerojatnije je da će u svojim džepovima imati jeftini Android telefon od 20 dolara.
And so if we do nothing to address the digital security divide, if we do nothing to ensure that everyone in our society gets the same benefits of encryption and is equally able to protect themselves from surveillance by the state, not only will the poor and vulnerable be exposed to surveillance, but future civil rights movements may be crushed before they ever reach their full potential.
I tako da, ako ne poduzmemo ništa da riješimo podjelu digitalne sigurnosti, ako ne poduzmemo ništa da osiguramo da svatko u našem društvu dobije jednaku korist od enkripcije i bude jednako u mogućnosti zaštititi se od prismotre države, ne samo da će siromašni i ranjivi biti izloženi nadzoru, već bi budući pokreti za građanska prava mogli biti uništeni, prije nego što uopće dostignu svoj puni potencijal.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)
Helen Walters: Chris, thank you so much. I have a question for you. We saw recently in the press that Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook covers over his camera and does something with his headphone mic jack. So I wanted to ask you a personal question, which is: Do you do that? And, on behalf of everyone here, particularly myself, Should we be doing that? Should we be covering these things?
Helen Walters: Chris, hvala ti puno. Imam pitanje za tebe. Nedavno smo vidjeli u tisku da Mark Zuckerberg iz Facebooka prekriva svoju kameru i radi nešto sa svojom utičnicom za slušalice. Zato sam te željela pitati osobno pitanje, a to je: Radiš li i ti to? I u ime svih prisutnih, pogotovo mene, trebamo li i mi to raditi? Trebamo li prekrivati te dijelove?
Christopher Soghoian: Putting a sticker -- actually, I like Band-Aids, because you can remove them and put them back on whenever you want to make a call or a Skype call. Putting a sticker over your web cam is probably the best thing you can do for your privacy in terms of bang for buck. There really is malware, malicious software out there that can take over your web cam, even without the light turning on. This is used by criminals. This is used by stalkers. You can buy $19.99 "spy on your ex-girlfriend" software online. It's really terrifying. And then, of course, it's used by governments. And there's obviously a sexual violence component to this, which is that this kind of surveillance can be used most effectively against women and other people who can be shamed in our society. Even if you think you have nothing to hide, at the very least, if you have children, teenagers in your lives, make sure you put a sticker on their camera and protect them.
Christopher Soghoian: Staviti naljepnicu, zapravo, ja volim flastere, jer ih možete ukloniti i vratiti natrag kad god želite zvati redovno ili preko Skypea. Stavljanje naljepnice preko web kamere vjerojatno je najbolje što možete učiniti za svoju privatnost u smislu dobivenog za uloženi novac. Zaista postoji malware, zloćudni softver koji može preuzeti vašu web kameru a da ona nije ni upaljena. To koriste kriminalci, stalkeri (uhode). Možete kupiti softver za špijuniranje svoje djevojke za 20 dolara. To je vrlo zastrašujuće. I onda, naravno, to koriste vlade. Očigledno postoji komponenta seksualnog nasilja u ovome, a to je da se ova vrsta nadzora najučinkovitije može koristiti protiv žena i drugih ljudi koje se može osramotiti u našem društvu. Čak i ako mislite da nemate što kriti, barem, ako imate djecu, tinejdžere, pobrinite se da stavite naljepnicu na njihovu kameru i zaštitite ih.
HW: Wow. Thank you so much. CS: Thank you.
HW: Hvala ti puno. CS: Hvala.
HW: Thanks, Chris.
HW: Hvala, Chris.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)