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

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in iCloud edited February 21

Rather than comply with a UK order to make a backdoor into encrypted data, Apple has announced it will no longer offer Advanced Data Protection in that country.

UK Parliament
UK Parliament



In 2024, the UK revamped its UK Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 to give itself the authority to legally -- and secretly -- compel Apple to break the end-to-end encryption that its security and privacy depends on. Despite bipartisan protests from the US, the UK issued the order and Apple cannot continue to operate its end-to-end encryption without breaking the law.

Instead of allowing the UK backdoor access to encrypted data, however, Apple has announced that it is switching off the encryption. This technically complies with the law, but means Apple does not create a backdoor that the UK or other bad actors could use.

Apple can no longer offer Advanced Data Protection (ADP) in the United Kingdom to new users and current UK users will eventually need to disable this security feature. ADP protects iCloud data with end-to-end encryption, which means the data can only be decrypted by the user who owns it, and only on their trusted devices.

We are gravely disappointed that the protections provided by ADP will not be available to our customers in the UK given the continuing rise of data breaches and other threats to customer privacy. Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end-to-end encryption is more urgent than ever before.

Apple remains committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data and are hopeful that we will be able to do so in the future in the United Kingdom. As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services and we never will.



This does not mean that all iCloud services are to lose their encryption within the UK. Apple says that iCloud Keychain and Health, for instance, plus iMessage and FaceTime, will remain end-to-end encrypted.

However, certain other iCloud services will lose their encryption for users in the UK:


  • iCloud Backup

  • iCloud Drive

  • Photos

  • Notes

  • Reminders

  • Safari Bookmarks

  • Siri Shortcuts

  • Voice memoes

  • Wallet passes

  • Freeform



The changes are effective immediately for new users, who will not be able to enable encryption on these services. Existing users will have an as yet unspecified period of time before encryption must be disabled.

Smartphone screen displaying a notification about the unavailability of Advanced Data Protection for new users in the United Kingdom. Describes iCloud encryption features and data categories.
The message new UK users now get about Advanced Data Protection in Settings



Apple notes that it can't disable the Advanced Data Protection for users itself. Instead, users will have to manually disable the feature in order to keep using iCloud.

The company says that instructions on how to do this will be provided shortly.

Apple also notes that Advanced Data Protection will continue to be available everywhere else in the world.

What happens next



It is conceivable that Apple will ultimately be able to reverse this and reintroduce encryption for the UK, but even if it does happen, it's not known how long that will take.

The reason is that as well as making its demands in secret, the UK government has a unique answer to appeals. Apple can appeal to a UK technical court against the government's demands, but it cannot wait for the result to comply with the order.

Ultimately, the UK has got what it wanted. The original demand was for a backdoor that would allow it access to the data of any iCloud user anywhere in the world.

Given that Apple has previously gone to court to refuse the same request from the FBI, it was never going to capitulate to the UK. But to stay within the law, it had to remove the encryption for the UK.

Which means that UK has the unencrypted access it wanted for its own citizens -- who have not been consulted on this.



Read on AppleInsider

jbirdiikundewme
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 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. 
    sphericlinkmanjbdragonbaconstangwatto_cobra
     4Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 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. 
    For better or for worst. I guess SCP-1678 is real 🤷🏻‍♂️. Much like the Apple Safari privacy ad.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 53
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 1,391member
    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. 
    If you don't think American cities are awash in camera-tracking, you haven't been paying attention. This is exactly how Luigi Mangione was caught--photos were posted that had been taken by various security cameras. Between tracking by cameras, cellphones and automated tolling systems, we are well on our way to Big Brother. I fully expect Trump, in his unending quest for dictatorship power, to order the end of encryption here in the U.S.. sooner than later. 
    apple4thewindewmespherictdknoxjamnapirwinmauricelinkmanmarklarkjbdragonJanNL
     8Likes 6Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 53
    I wrote to my MP, for all the good it'll do.
    kiltedgreenappleinsiderusermarklarkGabyJanNLilarynxbaconstangwatto_cobra
     7Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 53
    Scot1scot1 Posts: 130member
    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…
    thtstevemebsStabitha_Christieappleinsideruserrcnap1@gmail.comjbdragonfolk fountainiobservesconosciutoroundaboutnow
     2Likes 18Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 53
    Disappointed in Apple here. They should have stood up to the UK Government and just said no
    tdknoxwilliamlondonjbdragonzeus423folk fountainiobservesconosciutoWesley Hilliardpulseimagesteejay2012
     0Likes 11Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 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?
    tdknoxtiredskillskkqd1337jbdragonzeus423sconosciutopulseimagesbaconstangwatto_cobra
     8Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 53
    JFC_PAjfc_pa Posts: 962member
    Reasonable. 

    Let their electorate (subjects?) figure out what they want. 
    marklarkjbdragonzeus423zigzaglensbaconstang
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 53
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 8,201member
    Time for an Apple NAS and router. Simple, secure and local, yet with cellular synchronisation to other devices as an option.

    It might lead to slightly less iCloud subscription activity but would be a hardware revenue driver all the same. 
    Alex1Nforgot usernameh4y3swatto_cobra
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 53
    The UK is not a democracy, sadly.  UK governments though voted in by the public do very little for the public.

    Most elected politicians have no knowledge of the role they are taking on, many have never actually worked. They, therefore, have an idea and expect the civil service to put that idea into practice.  A lot of the ideas are simply vanity projects and even those which aren’t are not usually based on proper research. The result is a load of completely un-thought through nonsense, on which vast amounts of tax-payers money is wasted.  Not only that but most money which is spent goes to the already wealthy, the same people as the politicians and their elite clique.

    The elite absolutely do not want end to end encryption because it’s hampers their ability to control the population and, preferably, keep it in a state of constant fear.
    tiredskillsAlex1NlinkmanjbdragonsconosciutoAlekksswatto_cobra
     6Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 53
    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. 
    jamnapihatescreennameswilliamlondonAlex1N9secondkox2TheSparklemarklarkjbdragonzeus423folk fountain
     17Likes 2Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 12 of 53
    A smart move by Apple to a ridiculous request, made up by folks with no understanding of encryption. 
    muthuk_vanalingamAlex1N9secondkox2marklarkjbdragonolszeus423iobservepichaelzigzaglens
     13Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 53
    avon b7 said:
    Time for an Apple NAS and router. Simple, secure and local, yet with cellular synchronisation to other devices as an option.

    It might lead to slightly less iCloud subscription activity but would be a hardware revenue driver all the same. 
    This would be a very bad move for business. Apple makes a lot of money with services. 
    Also, your house doesn’t offer the same protections as cloud storage. These cloud storage locations have all kinds of protections in place that a consumer NAS doesn’t provide. 
    Alex1N9secondkox2command_ftmaywatto_cobra
     4Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 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?
    The point remains that you can't have a "secure" backdoor that's only open to certain people. It's impossible to make. So sooner or later it will be compromised and abused and then everyone is screwed.
    sphericktapperandominternetpersonAlex1Nlinkman9secondkox2MacProjbdragonzeus423jason leavitt
     17Likes 0Dislikes 2Informatives
  • Reply 15 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.

    How long before the US refuses to do business with the UK because they can’t trust dealing with a country without security?
    ktappeAlex1Nlinkman9secondkox2appleinsiderusermarklarkjbdragonolsJanNLh4y3s
     15Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 16 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…
    Well, for one thing it's not (typically) done in secret accompanied by gag orders. Also, this would essentially be the equivalent of a court issuing a blanket warrant to search anyone, anywhere for anything, including areas outside its jurisdiction, which is not the way a democracy/free society is supposed to function.

    Yes, it's a bad idea because its incompatible with secure E2EE. A backdoor is also a guarantee that a foreign power or criminals will compromise the back door.

    You find the balance by respecting privacy and not trampling the rights of 99.9999% of the people to catch the other 0.0001% who are doing something wrong.

    I'll leave you with John Gruber's take, which I agree with completely, for you to ponder [emphasis mine]:
    The bottom line is that the UK government is proceeding like a tyrannical authoritarian state. That’s not hyperbole. And the breathtaking scope of their order — being able to secretly snoop, without notice that they even have the capability, not only on their own citizens but every Apple user in the entire world — suggests a delusional belief that the British Empire still stands. It’s simultaneously infuriatingly offensive, mathematically ignorant (regarding the nature of end-to-end encryption), dangerous (as proven by the recent Salt Typhoon attack China successfully waged to eavesdrop on non-E2EE communications in the United States), and laughably naive regarding the UK’s actual power and standing in the world.
    Alex1NlinkmanMacPromarklarkjbdragonolsroundaboutnowmuthuk_vanalingamdave marshjido
     14Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 17 of 53
    The next option for Parliament would be to "require" Apple to provide the same encryption options they provide customers elsewhere in the world (say, "same as the US")--and a back door.

    Then, I would hope, Apple would say, "sorry UK customers, we can no longer sell or support iPhone in the UK."
    marklarkjbdragonzeus423JanNLteejay2012pichaelsedicivalvoleAlekkssBart Ywatto_cobra
     9Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 18 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…
    Watch this: https://youtu.be/VPBH1eW28mo?si=NqtJl0B9AhpWW5Sh 
    williamlondonols
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 19 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”
    9secondkox2marklarksphericjbdragonsconosciutomuthuk_vanalingamdave marshteejay2012h4y3sMisterKit
     14Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 20 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.
    9secondkox2jbdragoncommand_fwatto_cobra
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.