In the spring of 2016, a legal battle between Apple and the Federal Bureau of Investigation captured the world's attention.
U proleće 2016, pravna borba između Epla i FBI-a zapala je svetu 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.
Epl je ugradio bezbednosne odlike 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 Eplove korisnike je ovo velika stvar. Ali vlade nisu tako srećne. Vidite, Epl je napravio svesnu odluku da bude van prismotre. Epl je pokušao da oteža prismotru što više je moguće vladama i bilo kojim akterima.
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 sistema za telefone na svetskom tržištu pametnih telefona: iOS i Android. iOS je napravio Epl. Android je napravio Gugl. Epl je potrošio puno vremena i novca da se osigura da su njihovi proizvodi što je više moguće bezbedni. Epl podrazumevano šifruje sve podatke uskladištene na iPhone, i tekstualne poruke poslane od jednog do drugog Epl korisnika su šifrovane automatski bez da korisnik mora šta preduzeti.
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.
Ovo znači da, ako policija zapleni ajfon, a on ima šifru, imaće poteškoća sa dobijanjem podataka sa njega, ako to uopšte mogu uraditi. Nasuprot tome, bezbednost Androida nije tako dobra. Android telefoni, ili bar većina Android telefona koji su prodati korisnicima, ne šifruju podatke uskladištene na uređaju automatski, a unapred instalirana aplikacija za poruke na Androidu ne koristi šifrovanje. Tako da ako policija zapleni Android telefon, sve su šanse da će moći da dobiju sve željene podatke sa 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 dve od najvećih kompanija sveta; jedna koja automatski štiti podatke, i druga koja ne štiti.
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.
Epl je prodavac luksuznih dobara. On dominira na visokom tržištu. A mi bismo očekivali od proizvođača luksuznih dobara da njegovi proizvodi uključuju više odlika. Ali ne mogu svi sebi priuštiti ajfon. Tu Android stvarno, stvarno dominira: na srednjem i nižem delu tržišta, pametni telefoni za milijardu i po ljudi koji ne mogu ili neće da potroše 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 nazivam "podelom digitalne bezbednosti". To jest, sada je sve veći razmak između privatnosti i bezbednosti bogatih, koji sebi mogu priuštiti uređaje koji automatski štite njihove podatke, i siromašnih, čiji uređaji rade veoma 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.
Pa, zamislite prosečnog korisnika Eplovih proizvoda: bankara, advokata, doktora, političara. Ove osobe sada sve više imaju telefone u svojim džepovima koji šifruju njihove pozive, njihove tekstualne poruke, sve te podatke na uređaju, bez da oni urade bilo šta da zaštite svoje informacije. Nasuprot tome, siromašni i najranjiviji u našim društvima koriste uređaje zbog kojih su potpuno osetljivi na prismotru.
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, gde živim, Afro-Amerikance će češće videti kao sumnjive i češće će ih proveravati, i verovatnije je da će biti meta prismotre države. Ali mnogo je verovatnije da će Afro-Amerikanci koristiti Android uređaje koji ne preduzimaju ništa da ih zaštite od prismotre. Ovo 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 setiti da je prismotra alat. To je alat kojeg koriste moćni protiv onih koji nemaju moć. I dok mislim da je odlično da kompanije poput Epla olakšavaju ljudima šifrovanje, ako su jedini ljudi koji se mogu zaštititi od pogleda vlade bogati i moćni, to je problem. A to nije samo problem privatnosti ili sajber bezbednosti. 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 ranjive korisnike koji zavise od ovih uređaja. Ovo je zapravo problem za našu demokratiju. Objasniću šta sam mislio.
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 proleća" i "Okupirajmo Volstrit". Organizatori ovih pokreta i članovi ovih pokreta sve više komuniciraju i koordinišu pomoću pametnih telefona. I tako, vlade koje se osećaju ugroženo od strane ovih pokreta će takođe ciljati organizatore i njihove pametne telefone. Sada, veoma je moguće da će budući Martin Luter King ili Mandela ili Gandi imati ajfon i biti zaštićeni od prismotre vlade. Ali sve su šanse da će imati jeftini Android telefon od 20 dolara u svojim džepovima.
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 preduzmemo ništa da rešimo podelu digitalne bezbednosti, ako ne preduzmemo ništa da obezbedimo da svako u našem društvu dobija istu korist šifrovanja i bude jednako u mogućnosti da se zaštiti od prismotre države, ne samo da će siromašni i ranjivi biti izloženi prismotri, već bi budući pokreti za građanska prava mogli biti uništeni pre nego što dostignu svoj puni potencijal.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)
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 Volters: Krise, hvala ti puno. Imam pitanje za tebe. Skoro smo videli u štampi da Mark Cukerberg iz Fejsbuka prekriva svoju kameru i radi nešto sa svojim priključkom za slušalice sa mikrofonom. Pa sam želela da te pitam lično pitanje, a to je: radiš li ti to? I, u ime svih prisutnih, pogotovo mene, treba li mi da radimo to? Treba li da prekrivamo ove stvari?
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.
Kristofer Sogojan: Stavljanje nalepnice - zapravo, ja volim flastere, jer ih možete ukloniti i vratiti nazad kad god želite da pozovete nekoga redovno ili preko Skajpa. Stavljanje nalepnice preko vaše web kamere je verovatno najbolja stvar koju možete uraditi za vašu privatnost u smislu toga da dobijate mnogo za uloženi novac. Zaista postoji malver, maliciozan softver koji može da preuzme vašu kameru u svoje ruke, a da se lampica i ne uključi. Ovo koriste kriminalci. Ovo koriste lovci. Možete kupiti softver "za špijuniranje svoje devojke" za 20 dolara. Veoma je zastrašujući. I onda, naravno, to koriste vlade. Očigledno postoji komponenta seksualnog nasilja u ovome, a to je da se ova vrsta prismotre najefektivnije može koristiti protiv žena i drugih ljudi koji se mogu sramotiti u našem društvu. Čak iako mislite da nemate šta da krijete, barem, ako imate decu, tinejdžere, postarajte se da ste stavili nalepnicu na njihovu kameru i zaštitili ih.
HW: Wow. Thank you so much. CS: Thank you.
HV: Hvala ti puno. KS: Hvala.
HW: Thanks, Chris.
HV: Hvala Krise.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)