Why We Support Individual Privacy and Security

Why We Support Individual Privacy and Security

Data scientists, cryptographers and cybersecurity experts, including those who work for the U.S. government, stress how important it is for software developers to practice  “security by design.” In other words, as builders, we’re responsible for considering security from day one of development. This is why, in light of the Apple v. Lynch case, we have serious concerns about deliberately weakening secure communications. Doing so puts the technologies that power our lives at increased risk for exploit from thieves and other bad actors, ultimately making us less secure.

Undermining these protections, even once, and even for the right reason – seriously endangers the privacy and security of all individuals for generations to come.

Striking a balance between privacy and security, the needs of law enforcement and the risks created by “backdoors,” calls for a robust public conversation. That conversation must include input from large technology companies as well as businesses at all stages of growth.

This is not a debate that should be decided by the courts based on a statute written centuries before the age of the internet and smartphones.

Our Responsibility

We have a responsibility to the developers and end users who communicate using Twilio’s APIs to uphold the values of security, privacy and transparency. This is why we have filed an amicus brief in support of Apple’s position along with Airbnb, Atlassian, Automattic, CloudFlare, eBay, GitHub, Kickstarter, LinkedIn, Mapbox, Meetup, Reddit, Square, Squarespace, Twitter and Wickr.

Using a law written in 1789, the government is attempting to force Apple to develop software that will undermine the security of their product and the potential privacy of all its users.  This government order, should it prevail, would set a dangerous precedent that essentially co-opts Apple and any other technology company to be part of the government’s investigative arm.  In doing so, the government asks Apple to deliberately weaken the security of all its users.

We are also concerned that this precedent would create an undue burden on small businesses and developers.  The extensive legal resources required to oppose such requests, along with the potential costs of redeveloping technology, would negatively impact any business.  The impact would be even greater on small businesses and developers with ideas that are just coming to fruition.

In standing by security, privacy and transparency principles, we have and will continue to oppose efforts to deliberately weaken encryption or other information security measures through backdoors.

You can review the brief here.