&gt; 1) It&#x27;s a backdoor because it&#x27;s software, not a physical device like your example. They are not asking them to make a robot finger to push the buttons. It&#x27;s not only more trivial to unlock the device, it&#x27;s significantly more likely the software is copied and leaked into malicious hands.<p>If I wanted to get into my neighbors house, and I had some way to compel a construction crew to come install a new door in that house so I can walk through it, that would not mean <i>houses now have back doors</i>. That would be a very disingenuous way of putting it.<p>&quot;But what if the software is copied&quot; is the only argument that holds any weight, and I don&#x27;t find it very convincing. If the &quot;copyability&quot; of sensitive software&#x2F;data is such a huge concern, then we should probably start asking how we intend to survive as a species.<p>&gt; 2) The outrage, in my opinion, is much more about your exact example -- that Apple is being compelled to develop this software themselves. That they are being legally required to weaken the value of their own product.<p>Perhaps, but that&#x27;s not what Tim Cook is saying.