And I'm sure they would never misuse this.

[Grumpmeister]

This piece of absolute bleeding lunacy was first reported by the Washington Post. The UK government is demanding unfettered access to Apple customer cloud storage via a backdoor. Now Kier, as someone who has claimed to be a human rights lawyer in the past I'm sure you've heard that 1984 was a warning not a blueprint. We aren't just talking UK citizens here, they want access to be able to access data from all users no matter where in the world they are from. This is the kind of crap I'd expect to hear China, North Korea or Russia to try. Apple are appealing but if that fails I can easily see them shutting down all of their UK operations as the loss of the market here is far less damaging than a global customer exodus over privacy concerns. Especially given the government's glowing past record on data security.

UK security officials "demanded that Apple create a backdoor allowing them to retrieve all the content any Apple user worldwide has uploaded to the cloud," the report said. "The British government's undisclosed order, issued last month, requires blanket capability to view fully encrypted material, not merely assistance in cracking a specific account, and has no known precedent in major democracies."

You already have legislation in place that means you can demand Apple unlock encryption on phones and cloud data as part of a criminal or anti terror investigation so why do you need this extreme overreach? 

This is from Apple's testimony opposing this move.

The IPA's existing powers are already extremely broad and pose a significant risk to the global availability of vitally important security technologies. Under the current law, the UKG [UK government] can issue a 'Technical Capability Notice' that seeks to obligate a provider to remove an 'electronic protection' to allow access to data that is otherwise unavailable due to encryption. In addition, the Secretary of State ('SoS') has been granted the further authority to prohibit the provider from disclosing any information about such a requirement to its users or the public without the SoS's express permission.

Moreover, the IPA purports to apply extraterritorially, permitting the UKG to assert that it may impose secret requirements on providers located in other countries and that apply to their users globally. Together, these provisions could be used to force a company like Apple, that would never build a backdoor into its products, to publicly withdraw critical security features from the UK market, depriving UK users of these protections.

I don't think anyone in the government has even considered the political shitstorm this will unleash. How many members of foreign governments use iPhones? This will not end well.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/uk-demands-apple-break-encryption-to-allow-govt-spying-worldwide-reports-say/

[Barman]

This piece of absolute bleeding lunacy was first reported by the Washington Post. The UK government is demanding unfettered access to Apple customer cloud storage via a backdoor. Now Kier, as someone who has claimed to be a human rights lawyer in the past I'm sure you've heard that 1984 was a warning not a blueprint. We aren't just talking UK citizens here, they want access to be able to access data from all users no matter where in the world they are from. This is the kind of crap I'd expect to hear China, North Korea or Russia to try. Apple are appealing but if that fails I can easily see them shutting down all of their UK operations as the loss of the market here is far less damaging than a global customer exodus over privacy concerns. Especially given the government's glowing past record on data security.

UK security officials "demanded that Apple create a backdoor allowing them to retrieve all the content any Apple user worldwide has uploaded to the cloud," the report said. "The British government's undisclosed order, issued last month, requires blanket capability to view fully encrypted material, not merely assistance in cracking a specific account, and has no known precedent in major democracies."

You already have legislation in place that means you can demand Apple unlock encryption on phones and cloud data as part of a criminal or anti terror investigation so why do you need this extreme overreach? 

This is from Apple's testimony opposing this move.

The IPA's existing powers are already extremely broad and pose a significant risk to the global availability of vitally important security technologies. Under the current law, the UKG [UK government] can issue a 'Technical Capability Notice' that seeks to obligate a provider to remove an 'electronic protection' to allow access to data that is otherwise unavailable due to encryption. In addition, the Secretary of State ('SoS') has been granted the further authority to prohibit the provider from disclosing any information about such a requirement to its users or the public without the SoS's express permission.

Moreover, the IPA purports to apply extraterritorially, permitting the UKG to assert that it may impose secret requirements on providers located in other countries and that apply to their users globally. Together, these provisions could be used to force a company like Apple, that would never build a backdoor into its products, to publicly withdraw critical security features from the UK market, depriving UK users of these protections.

I don't think anyone in the government has even considered the political shitstorm this will unleash. How many members of foreign governments use iPhones? This will not end well.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/uk-demands-apple-break-encryption-to-allow-govt-spying-worldwide-reports-say/

They can already demand you unlock your phone and chuck you in jail on a terrorism charge if you refuse... Outrageous! 

[Steve]

Not a 'terrorism charge', that's an urban myth. 

[Steve]

This piece of absolute bleeding lunacy was first reported by the Washington Post. The UK government is demanding unfettered access to Apple customer cloud storage via a backdoor. Now Kier, as someone who has claimed to be a human rights lawyer in the past I'm sure you've heard that 1984 was a warning not a blueprint. We aren't just talking UK citizens here, they want access to be able to access data from all users no matter where in the world they are from. This is the kind of crap I'd expect to hear China, North Korea or Russia to try. Apple are appealing but if that fails I can easily see them shutting down all of their UK operations as the loss of the market here is far less damaging than a global customer exodus over privacy concerns. Especially given the government's glowing past record on data security.

UK security officials "demanded that Apple create a backdoor allowing them to retrieve all the content any Apple user worldwide has uploaded to the cloud," the report said. "The British government's undisclosed order, issued last month, requires blanket capability to view fully encrypted material, not merely assistance in cracking a specific account, and has no known precedent in major democracies."

You already have legislation in place that means you can demand Apple unlock encryption on phones and cloud data as part of a criminal or anti terror investigation so why do you need this extreme overreach? 

This is from Apple's testimony opposing this move.

The IPA's existing powers are already extremely broad and pose a significant risk to the global availability of vitally important security technologies. Under the current law, the UKG [UK government] can issue a 'Technical Capability Notice' that seeks to obligate a provider to remove an 'electronic protection' to allow access to data that is otherwise unavailable due to encryption. In addition, the Secretary of State ('SoS') has been granted the further authority to prohibit the provider from disclosing any information about such a requirement to its users or the public without the SoS's express permission.

Moreover, the IPA purports to apply extraterritorially, permitting the UKG to assert that it may impose secret requirements on providers located in other countries and that apply to their users globally. Together, these provisions could be used to force a company like Apple, that would never build a backdoor into its products, to publicly withdraw critical security features from the UK market, depriving UK users of these protections.

I don't think anyone in the government has even considered the political shitstorm this will unleash. How many members of foreign governments use iPhones? This will not end well.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/uk-demands-apple-break-encryption-to-allow-govt-spying-worldwide-reports-say/

Unwise by the government. 

Interesting though that the USA has at times (and maybe still does) prohibit individuals having access to super strong encryption so Apple may not have a solid position here.

[Grumpmeister]

Don't think that will weaken Apple's position too much, the difference between denying specific individuals encryption and demanding unfettered access across the board is significant enough to build a defence against. Especially with the legislation already in place. And as I've said if they do lose their appeal I can easily see Apple weighing their potential losses and going scorched earth on the UK, shutting down their operations here and blocking cloud access while blaming the government's unreasonable demands in order to protect their larger global customer base.

[Steve]

IIRC the USA law is that you can use hard encryption for personal purposes just as long as you do not transmit an encrypted file or message to another.  There was also the weird position that you could buy a copy of Microsoft Money in the USA but if you took it out of the country you were risking 2 years jail.

My work laptop was hard encrypted and every time I went to the USA on business I'd do a hard delete of its entire data content before leaving and if I'd been asked for the passphrase at the airport yes I'd have given it.

Hard encrypted data should be like documents you keep at home.  IF (big IF) a police officer has good reason to believe it is evidence of crime then you should give up the passphrase just like you have to allow search warrant access to your home.   The Terrorism Act does not have that 'good reason' constraint.

And frankly Apple can afford to thumb its nose at the UK