Apple has released a public statement on the NSA PRISM surveillance program, denying any backdoor server access for government agencies, and revealing just how many court orders for data disclosures it has seen in recent months. Between December 1, 2012 and May 31, 2013, Apple received as many as 5,000 requests from US law enforcement for data on Apple customers, the Cupertino firm said, covering between 9,000 and 10,000 accounts or devices. However, Apple points out, the most frequent reason wasn’t counterterrorism, as you might expect.
In fact, it’s altogether more everyday purposes that Apple gets requests for help on. “The most common form of request comes from police investigating robberies and other crimes,” the company says, “searching for missing children, trying to locate a patient with Alzheimer’s disease, or hoping to prevent a suicide.”
According to the statement, Apple first heard about PRISM when the initial stories broke on June 6. Then, allegations were made that Apple – among others, including Google – had given the NSA privileged access to its servers, under the blanket terms of FISA and the vague justification of anti-terrorism efforts.
Several companies were quick to deny the claims, however, and Apple maintains that “we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities” and even then only if its legal team can’t pick any holes in the request. Some data simply can’t be handed over at all, the company adds, since Apple opts not to retain it in the first place.
That includes Siri requests “in any identifiable form”, along with Map searches, and data linked to users’ locations. “Conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption,” Apple says, “so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them.”
Apple isn’t the first to react strongly to the accusations. Google CEO Larry Page got in early to deny PRISM involvement, also claiming to have not heard about the program until the public reports in early June, and insisting that there was no backdoor access to the company’s servers.
However, it’s not only the companies named who have taken issue with PRISM’s big reveal. US Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper slammed the leakers for potentially endangering national security with the “dangerous inaccuracies” in the coverage, for instance.
The story looks unlikely to go away any time soon, however. Check out our SlashGear 101 to get up to speed on PRISM, FISA, and the modern NSA.
Apple Statement on “Commitment to Customer Privacy”:
Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism” program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.
Like several other companies, we have asked the U.S. government for permission to report how many requests we receive related to national security and how we handle them. We have been authorized to share some of that data, and we are providing it here in the interest of transparency.
From December 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013, Apple received between 4,000 and 5,000 requests from U.S. law enforcement for customer data. Between 9,000 and 10,000 accounts or devices were specified in those requests, which came from federal, state and local authorities and included both criminal investigations and national security matters. The most common form of request comes from police investigating robberies and other crimes, searching for missing children, trying to locate a patient with Alzheimer’s disease, or hoping to prevent a suicide.
Regardless of the circumstances, our Legal team conducts an evaluation of each request and, only if appropriate, we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities. In fact, from time to time when we see inconsistencies or inaccuracies in a request, we will refuse to fulfill it.
Apple has always placed a priority on protecting our customers’ personal data, and we don’t collect or maintain a mountain of personal details about our customers in the first place. There are certain categories of information which we do not provide to law enforcement or any other group because we choose not to retain it.
For example, conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them. Apple cannot decrypt that data. Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form.
We will continue to work hard to strike the right balance between fulfilling our legal responsibilities and protecting our customers’ privacy as they expect and deserve.