As the FBI and Apple continue to go toe-to-toe on a digital security issue concerning gaining access to the iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters, Mark Skilton, Professor of Practice at Warwick Business School and an expert on cyber-security reacts:
"I agree with these principles but I'm not hearing the voice about how to deal with strong encryption technology and citizen and national defence which has some challenges.
"It's a wicked problem that needs some comparators that don't exist today. I agree backdoor methods will be disastrous based on hacker history, but it will drive more advanced location behaviour and data traffic surveillance monitoring if strong encryption is used. This is a digital disruption downside.
"The California court using a law from the 18th Century says much about inadequacy of current legislation for the virtual economy. The 1789 All Writs Act ignores context and just forces compliance. ...
"(a) The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.
"(b) An alternative writ or rule nisi may be issued by a justice or judge of a court which has jurisdiction.
"A Decree nisi seems to just be based on the one condition of 'find a judge from somewhere' to authorise access. Not a great piece of legislature.
"Probably the area of precedent in similarity is in the European Court of Human Rights with war crimes where anonymity of victims must be weighed for protection versus being able to expose perpetrators.
"The issue is different with obfuscated identity caused by a new digital capability that is not just social or cultural silence aka the complicity of silence.
"I'm much more worried about the sound of silence."