Apple turns off data protection in the UK rather than comply with backdoor mandate

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 53
    Apple’s data protection is a key differentiator over competitors. 

    It seems the UK and Europe are all about chopping down successful American companies rather giving their people tje freedom to than enjoy the benefits of that success. 

    The Uk is only satisfied if Apple devices are LESS SECURE? Tells us everything we need to know. 

    The creepiness continues. 
    MacPromarklarkzeus423zigzaglenstomkarlbaconstangjbdragonBart Ywatto_cobra
     8Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 53
    iobserve said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    If you're "disappointed in Apple here" you clearly don't understand the subject. Go re-read

    the other alternative would be to make a backdoor to all iPhone end to end encryption in the world and tell no one about it. That's what you'd rather them do? No, you just didn't read carefully. 
    I seriously mean it 

    Apple should have just had the balls to say no. Need some brinkmanship. 

    Ball would then be in the UK government court to see what they would actually do.

    What could they do? Fine? Don’t pay. Ban Apple ? Would never happen. 
    marklarkiobservejbdragon9secondkox2williamlondonwatto_cobra
     3Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 53
    Easiest thing to get it reinstated ASAP? Hack a PM’s iCloud account, sell nice juicy compromising messages to the rags, along with “would not have happened but for you stupid law you collective head of knuckles”
    Unfortunately that sounds about right

    marklarkdave marshirwinmauricejbdragonwatto_cobra
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 53
    iobserve said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    If you're "disappointed in Apple here" you clearly don't understand the subject. Go re-read

    the other alternative would be to make a backdoor to all iPhone end to end encryption in the world and tell no one about it. That's what you'd rather them do? No, you just didn't read carefully. 
    The other alternative would be to say no to both and let the uk really show their people who they are. 
    jbdragonwatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 53
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,055member
    Do we have any idea as to what the biggest competitors to Apple in this space -- Android and/or Samsung -- is doing regarding this? I can only imagine they have complied without notifying anyone or are soon to announce their plan.
    ctt_zhjbdragonBart Ywatto_cobra
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 53
    kkqd1337 said:
    iobserve said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    If you're "disappointed in Apple here" you clearly don't understand the subject. Go re-read

    the other alternative would be to make a backdoor to all iPhone end to end encryption in the world and tell no one about it. That's what you'd rather them do? No, you just didn't read carefully. 
    I seriously mean it 

    Apple should have just had the balls to say no. Need some brinkmanship. 

    Ball would then be in the UK government court to see what they would actually do.

    What could they do? Fine? Don’t pay. Ban Apple ? Would never happen. 

    Ok then- you want them to be jailed for contempt of a direct legal order... that's one hell of a sacrifice you're willing to make for someone else. 

    And where is your true outrage at meta/whatsapp and all other messaging platforms that have just gone along with the order, allow the UK to snoop on its people globally, and have said nothing? Or you think Apple should just join them and give the UK a global back door to E2EE?
    randominternetpersonjbdragonsconosciutowilliamlondonbaconstangsedicivalvoleBart Ywatto_cobra
     8Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 53
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,055member
    Easiest thing to get it reinstated ASAP? Hack a PM’s iCloud account, sell nice juicy compromising messages to the rags, along with “would not have happened but for you stupid law you collective head of knuckles”
    Nope. If the PMs get hacked and come to the realization that E2EE is necessary to protect privacy but hinders government spying then they'll add an exclusion for the elites. PMs and other certain high-level snobs will get an amendment where companies are required to allow encryption for them but not the masses.
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 53
    Scot1 said:
    I’m not a lawyer, of course, but what’s the difference between getting a court ordered warrant to enter someone’s home or workplace if they are under investigation for bad acts against the population or the government and doing the same thing to investigate same on someone’s phone?  
    How do you find a balance between keeping people safe and respecting the rights of the individual?

    I thought that’s what the courts were supposed to do and so having a back channel to go into someone’s phone under the authority of the courts isn’t such a bad idea is it? I mean the whole premises if you’re not doing something wrong…
    When you put any backdoor in encryption, you have broken the encryption, and bad actors will exploit the backdoor to access everyone's information. 
    sconosciutoroundaboutnowdave marshirwinmauricejbdragonsedicivalvole
     6Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 53
    Scot1 said:
    I’m not a lawyer, of course, but what’s the difference between getting a court ordered warrant to enter someone’s home or workplace if they are under investigation for bad acts against the population or the government and doing the same thing to investigate same on someone’s phone?  
    How do you find a balance between keeping people safe and respecting the rights of the individual?

    I thought that’s what the courts were supposed to do and so having a back channel to go into someone’s phone under the authority of the courts isn’t such a bad idea is it? I mean the whole premises if you’re not doing something wrong…
    The difference is that with a back door they wouldn’t need a warrant. They also wouldn’t only search through the data of someone they suspect. They would have the power to sort through and gather ALL the data from EVERY user and keep it in perpetuity like China does. A bad actor in government could easily steal data and use it for nefarious purposes, even if a crime hasn’t been committed.

    and worse… if they went into your data with a backdoor, you would never know it, and they don’t have to tell you they did it.
    baconstangjbdragonsconosciutoBart Ywatto_cobra
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 53
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,723member
    linkman said:
    Do we have any idea as to what the biggest competitors to Apple in this space -- Android and/or Samsung -- is doing regarding this? I can only imagine they have complied without notifying anyone or are soon to announce their plan.
    Without a major software change, Google would be unable to comply. Unlike Apple, Google does not allow users to disable E2EE for user cloud backups or Google Messaging. It's automatic and not opt-in, and Google has no key. 
    ctt_zhmuthuk_vanalingamjbdragonwatto_cobra
     2Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 53
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,345member
    Quantum computers will eventually break all encryption anyway. It’s just a matter of time. But screw the UK government for hastening the process. 
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 53
    nubusnubus Posts: 768member
    Now would be the time for those living in the UK to review their personal Photos library before government does. And to start using to "Hello Constable" instead of "Hello Siri" when picking up their phone as the police constable might not be named Siri.

    Have to thank the UK voters for isolating the island from all neighbors before going all Orwellian.

    - end of Schadenfreude.
    sphericsconosciuto
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 53
    iobserve said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    iobserve said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    If you're "disappointed in Apple here" you clearly don't understand the subject. Go re-read

    the other alternative would be to make a backdoor to all iPhone end to end encryption in the world and tell no one about it. That's what you'd rather them do? No, you just didn't read carefully. 
    I seriously mean it 

    Apple should have just had the balls to say no. Need some brinkmanship. 

    Ball would then be in the UK government court to see what they would actually do.

    What could they do? Fine? Don’t pay. Ban Apple ? Would never happen. 

    Ok then- you want them to be jailed for contempt of a direct legal order... that's one hell of a sacrifice you're willing to make for someone else. 

    And where is your true outrage at meta/whatsapp and all other messaging platforms that have just gone along with the order, allow the UK to snoop on its people globally, and have said nothing? Or you think Apple should just join them and give the UK a global back door to E2EE?
    With great power comes great responsibility 

    All of these companies should just leave E2E encryption activated, and obviously refuse a backdoor….

    This would then force the UK government into a corner. Are they then seriously gonna start jailing executives like China? It would be interesting and a smart move from Apple etc to see if the UK would actually do that. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 53
    nubusnubus Posts: 768member
    kkqd1337 said:
    With great power comes great responsibility 

    All of these companies should just leave E2E encryption activated, and obviously refuse a backdoor….

    This would then force the UK government into a corner. Are they then seriously gonna start jailing executives like China? It would be interesting and a smart move from Apple etc to see if the UK would actually do that. 
    You want to replace democracy in UK with decisions made by a foreign CEO controlled by Chinese authorities by placing companies above the law. You even find "it interesting or smart". I don't.
    iobservewatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 53
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    Apple obeys the law in countries where it trades. That’s got to be the correct stance. Trouble is, this particular law is difficult because it does, in some cases, actually support doing good.  

    I’ve never understood why Apple gave in and didn’t implement their (non-intrusive, on-device) check for child pornography files going to iCloud. If they had put that in place, there would have been a much stronger argument against this new law.
    jbdragonsconosciutowatto_cobra
     0Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 53

    Sweet. No all we need to do is hack every politician’s iCloud account and distribute all their photos and notes and search history so that they then realise they were not intelligent and the UK gets security again.
    To be clear, the data on iCloud is still encrypted, it’s just that Apple now has the keys. So it would need two major breaches of Apple’s security (get to the data, get to the keys) to read it. The issue is that now the authorities (through a case by case legal process) can force Apple to offer up access to the (plain text) data. 

    This is a real mixed bag since it means that some badguys’ data may be able to be used against them. However, AIUI, the more competent users can just “manually” encrypt their data before sending to iCloud so defeating Apple’s access. So perhaps only the ignorant villains suffer along with, in principle, the innocent. 
    watto_cobra
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 53

    I wonder how the decision will translate to tourist or business travelers to the UK carrying iPhones?  That is, assuming the UK continues to admit travelers from the US.
    Let’s not invent new stuff here, the issue is clear and limited to “UK” users. Given that Apple did it this way, it isn’t going to impact foreign visitors to the UK, nor is data belonging even to UK users going to suddenly decrypt itself. 
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 53
    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    You seem to have missed the part where Apple didn't do what was asked, build in a backdoor, they simply stopped offering a feature. So they did in fact say "No to the request. 
    tomkarlwilliamlondonkkqd1337jbdragoniobservesconosciutowatto_cobra
     6Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 53

    kkqd1337 said:
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    Are you also disappointed in X/Twitter for completely capitulating to Brazil's rules a few months ago?
    Cool non-sequitur. 
    Xedwilliamlondonilarynxtmaymuthuk_vanalingamsconosciutowatto_cobra
     7Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 53
    Smart move. Actions have consequences. Though I suspect the Britons will not rise up in outrage. They tolerate a much lower bar for privacy than Americans—camera tracking in the public space in the UK is second only to China. British cop shows often feature sequences where folks are tracked continuously on monitors using a combination of CCTV and cell phone signals. 
    No. A real consequence would be Apple pulling its entire product line and support from the UK. Then 67 million people could decide if this action by their government is warranted. “You will lose all Apple products” carries way more weight than “you will lose end-to-end encryption for various features”, knowing most consumers have no idea what this means. 

    Not possible you say? Why not, Apple did it with Russia for reasons that had nothing to do with any of its products.
    williamlondonsedicivalvolewatto_cobra
     2Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.