gavinthain

Out come the Tin Hats. 

The UK governments request for backdoor access to encrypted data is not necessarily about creating a surveillance state but rather about ensuring law enforcement can access critical information in serious cases, such as terrorism, child exploitation, and organised crime. With encryption making it harder to investigate criminal activity, a controlled backdoor could allow authorities to act swiftly in emergencies, preventing attacks or saving lives. Other intelligence agencies already conduct mass surveillance, so formalising a legal mechanism for targeted access could add accountability.

However, creating a backdoor, even for government use, weakens encryption for everyone. Once a vulnerability exists, it could be exploited by cybercriminals, hostile foreign states, or even rogue officials. Theres also the issue of government overreach historically, surveillance powers have been expanded beyond their original purpose, raising concerns about abuse. Furthermore, if Apple is forced to comply in the UK, other governments, will demand the same, setting a precedent.

A potential compromise could involve strict oversight mechanisms, ensuring backdoor access is only used with court approval and in cases of national security threats. Rather than a universal backdoor, targeted decryption warrants for specific devices or cases may strike a better balance between security and privacy.

Bingo_Wings said:

This is starting to look like Copland part deux from the late 90s. Steve Jobs and NextStep saved Apple then. Who will ride to the rescue this time?

What exactly needs outside Support to rescue this? This is a software company saying, we're sorry but we need a bit more time.

Got it. Love it. 

If they don’t release wearables, they will go out of business.