48 ms·

Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

• vroomvroomboom 2y ago
  It's the right choice: don't bow to government pressure, let the people pressure the government.
  • ethagnawl 2y ago
    > let the people pressure the government. Hopefully they will.
    • tmjwid 2y ago
      I can't imagine many here (UK) will really care, we've had multiple breeches of privacy imposed on us by the powers that be. - Removed incorrect assumption of this not being reported.
      • darrenf 2y ago
        It's literally the number one story on https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ as I type this comment.
        • tmjwid 2y ago
          Yeah my bad.
        • gambiting 2y ago
          And I guarantee that the reaction from most people will be "good, I have nothing to hide so I have nothing to worry about". The apathy around this stuff in the UK is unbelivable - I've been trying to point out that hey, for years now something like 17 government agencies(including DEFRA - department of agriculture lol) can access your internet browsing history WITHOUT A WARRANT and that's absolutely fine. ISPs are required to keep your browsing history for a year too. Again, nothing to hide, why would I worry about it.
          • genewitch 2y ago
            Does and of the doh or other DNS stuff help with this at all? Is the only solution to VPN out of Europe?
            • DeepSeaTortoise 2y ago
              Only DNSCrypt provides any privacy. If you setup your relays properly.
          • spwa4 2y ago
            The same is happening Europe-wide too. Everybody always points to the GPDR legislation. You know what is a feature of the GPDR too? Every European government (even some non-EU ones) can grant any exception to anyone to the GPDR for any reason. And, of course, every last one has granted an exception to the police, to courts, to the secret service, their equivalent of the IRS, and to government health care (which imho is a big problem when we're talking mental health care), and when I say government health care, note that this includes private providers of health care, in other words insurances. Note: these GPDR exclusions includes denying patients access to their own medical records. So if a hospital lies about "providing you" with mental health treatment (which they are incentivized to do, they get money for that), it can helpfully immediately be used in your divorce. For you yourself, however, it is conveniently impossible to verify if they've done this. Nor can you ask (despite GPDR explicitly granting you this right) to have your medical records just erased. In other words. GPDR was explicitly created to give people control over their own medical records, and to deny insurance providers and the IRS access. It does the exact opposite. Exactly the sort of information I would like to hide, exactly the people I would find it critical to hide it from. In other words: GPDR applies pretty much only to US FANG companies ... and no-one else. So: if you don't pay tax and use that money to pay for a cancer treatment, don't think for a second the GPDR will protect you. If you have cancer and would like to get insured, the insurance companies will know. Etc.
      • alt227 2y ago
        I agree, have an upvote. Even though its making the media headlines today, 99% of UK citizens will forget this tomorrow and it will fade into the mists of time. Just like evey other security infringement that any government has imposed on its citizens.
    • basisword 2y ago
      There was a lot of campaigning against the Investigatory Powers bill when it was introduced. It didn't help much given the people in power want more power regardless of where they sit on the political spectrum.
  • miroljub 2y ago
    How? In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
    • emorning3 2y ago
      Guns are an inefficient/stupid way to kill people anyway. Just ask Russia and Ukraine. Look around, human beings are quite clever.
    • krapp 2y ago
      Weird. In the US there is a right to bear arms, yet people are also pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
      • cupcakecommons 2y ago
        Who do you know that's been arrested for posting on social media? I don't know of anyone.
        • krapp 2y ago
          True. American police will shoot people dead in the streets with impunity, the military industrial complex engages in constant wars regardless of popular sentiment and the American government is currently being carved up by neo-nazis and oligarchs but you can legally be racist on the internet. I guess it truly is the land of the free. Also... wait six months.
          • cupcakecommons 2y ago
            [flagged]
    • saintfire 2y ago
      I'm sure shooting at the government would have solved this privacy issue.
  • Molitor5901 2y ago
    NO, it's the wrong choice. Most people do not understand this stuff enough to truly care about, and they just want their devices to work. This is an awful decision by Apple. There's really nothing consumers can do to pressure the British government.
    • MikeKusold 2y ago
      Those people aren’t enabling ADP to begin with.
      • Molitor5901 2y ago
        Exactly. There is a technological disconnect for a lot of people. They accept actions like this because they don't fully appreciate, IMHO, the ramifications. We do, and we must do more to educate people.
        • vroomvroomboom 2y ago
          [flagged]
          • 1propionyl 2y ago
            I'm sure the condescending attitude and negative stereotyping will sway readers.
    • afthonos 2y ago
      Consumers being unable to pressure government, even if true, does not imply this is a bad decision.
      • Molitor5901 2y ago
        It's a terrible decision that will have grave ramifications. I see no positive to this action.
  • madeofpalk 2y ago
    This is Apple condeeding. Apple lost. UK Government got (almost) what they wanted - a backdoor into iCloud accounts. Apple's only consolation prize is that its limited to UK users for now. But it seems inevitable that ADP will gradually be made illegal all around the world.
    • jahewson 2y ago
      Given that they’ve only prevented new signups it looks to me more like Apple is trying to apply pressure to the U.K. government to get them to back down. The law that permits this was passed in 2016 so the situation was default lost already.
      • alt227 2y ago
        They have said all existing ADP enabled accounts will be disabled or deleted in time. They need to give people time to migrate their data out before they nuke it.
• oddb0d 2y ago
  Hopefully it'll spur growth of decentralised, distributed peer to peer mobiles like the new Holochain-based Volla Phone https://volla.online/en/ https://volla.online/en/
• MrCroxx 2y ago
  I'm drunk. No offense. Why our world ends up like this.
  • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    Well, it usually starts with one...socially, like.
• giorgioz 2y ago
  > Caro Robson said she believed it was "unprecedented" for a company "simply to withdraw a product rather than cooperate with a government". She believes wrong. Google retreated from the Chinese market to not give in. Apple stayed in China and also banned VPNs on App Stores for Chinese customers. Kudos to Apple to not giving in to a backdoor in this case but some there companies took a even higher moral stand in some other situations, so there is precedent indeed.
• UnreachableCode 2y ago
  What is stopping me from using something like Proton in the same way? Why does the UK government simply make an example out of Apple on this one?
• quitit 2y ago
  What's stopping Apple from launching an AppleTV-esque device that functions as personal iCloud storage? The design of ADP is that even taking control of the data centre won't allow access to the information held within. Decentralising the service makes it significantly harder to write ham-fisted legislation that aims to prevent tech companies from offering secure products. Additionally there isn't a technical need for ADP to interface with iCloud. Apple could feasibly release free software for DIY ADP. My expectation is that either the UK will alter the law, or Apple will work around it. I don't think we're looking at the end of this.
  • nobankai 2y ago
    Commercial security is pure theatre at the end of the day. Apple could pretend to make a big stink, release a new encrypted Time Machine or leave the UK... but why? None of that makes them money. It's a band-aid for the user freedom that was amputated decades ago. I don't expect Apple to fight this like, say, the EU regulations. Without a profit incentive, it's hard to mobilize Apple to seek a solution.
    • quitit 2y ago
      >release a new encrypted Time Machine or leave the UK... but why? None of that makes them money. Would this device be free?
  • arccy 2y ago
    > Apple > freely release If Apple can't get you to pay for it, it won't happen. They only pay as much lip service to privacy as they need for marketing purposes
• curtisszmania 2y ago
  [dead]
• ej1 2y ago
  This is a great article!
• holoduke 2y ago
  Reading all the comments here makes me sick. I really need to move to a remote place where people are not constantly bashing each other.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• mrkramer 2y ago
  I always thought that metadata and circumstantial evidence is enough to incriminate someone. Do you really need plaintext data and communication to put criminals behind bars?
• vednig 2y ago
  we need something that's quantum safe
• justinclift 2y ago
  > "Apple saw this as a point of principle - if they were going to concede this to the UK then every other government around the world would want this." How is withdrawing the full encryption capability from UK users not condeding to the UK government?
• InsomniacL 2y ago
  malicious compliance. Providing access when ordered by a court is not as secure so we're removing all encryption?
  • smidgeon 2y ago
    End-to-end-encryption-except-when-the-UK-government-is-interested doesn't have the same ring to it, liable to damage the brand ....
    • nobankai 2y ago
      FWIW people always put too much trust in E2EE where they didn't control either end. This was a loooong time coming.
      • lokar 2y ago
        It’s not really end to end in that sense. They don’t get the key, they just store opaque data for you. The only way apple could get your data is to push code to your device to steal the key.
        • ferbivore 2y ago
          I think their point was that you don't control your device. If Apple did push code to your device to steal the key, how would you be able to tell?
      • dmix 2y ago
        People aren't going to use your self-hosted E2E tools on a wide scale. We've been down that road. Best to secure the systems people already use.
  • rxyz 2y ago
    the whole point of ADP is that they cannot provide access
    • 2y ago
• Retr0id 2y ago
  As someone currently a citizen of the UK, what are my best emigration opportunities?
  • nobankai 2y ago
    If you abhor surveillance, don't pick a Five-Eyes nation.
    • y33t 2y ago
      Don't forget the 14-Eyes, which includes most of Western Europe.
  • princetman 2y ago
    Depends on what you’re after * Australia * United States * Singapore * Dubai * Europe (Belgium/Switzerland/Netherlands)
    • bananapub 2y ago
      Australia is even more everyone-is-a-cop than the UK, and is doing this exact same shit for the exact same reason.
    • pjc50 2y ago
      If you're after freedom, you absolutely do not want Singapore or Dubai.
      • faku812 2y ago
        Australia is the worst of all
      • airhangerf15 2y ago
        The United States has the strongest laws for freedom of speech. You can't get arrested and face years of criminal legal trials, ending in an £800 fine for making a joke with your dog in America. Police won't show up at your house for Facebook posts like they do in Aussiestan. American courts probably won't take your infant away from you and force a medical procedure on it like in Kiwistan just because you wanted to use your own blood donors for the operation. It's been degrading in the US too. Xitter is not at all a free speech platform and that technocrat says whatever he has to for popularity until he can chip your brain. Cutting a few million in wasteful government spending doesn't make up for how he loves China and deeply desires their level of autocracy. America's laws have somehow held in-spite of presidents that seek to crush it (yes, both of them, both sides. They're the same. Stop believing the headlines and read the damn articles). Although defamation law has been weaponized to neuter some forms of speech and reporting. There is an internal push by the CIA in America to further destabilize it and cause radical elements in the fake-left and fake-right to call for more authoritarianism. It's not a great nation, but sadly it is the last bastion of true liberty .. and it's eroding every day from every side. In 20 years there might not be anywhere to flee to. Fight for your country. They can't put every British person in prison if everyone decided to tell the truth.
• LuciOfStars 2y ago
  Not gonna lie, I expected Apple to just kind of roll over and take the blow on this one. Interesting.
  • ben_w 2y ago
    If any of the tech firms would resist, it would be Apple. I wasn't sure which way they'd go.
    • scarface_74 2y ago
      While Apple especially under Tim Cook has done a lot questionable acquiescences under Cook for political expediences, they really didn’t have a choice here. It was the law. Now going back on Twitter to get in the good graces of President Musk and bringing TikTok back to the AppStore even though it is clearly against the law is different.
      • busymom0 2y ago
        > they really didn’t have a choice here They did have a choice. They could have said they will just get out of UK. That would have resulted in enough political turmoil in UK that their government would roll back this stupid law. Apple chickened out.
        • nobankai 2y ago
          Abandoning the UK market would hurt Apple more than it would hurt the UK. They are not a nation-state, Apple cannot wage diplomacy by threatening the government, they can only shoot their own foot off and say it was for the good of everyone. It would also partially validate the EU's regulation if they abandoned the UK but stayed in Europe. Apple very much doesn't want to feed either side a line.
          • busymom0 2y ago
            They could have started with not offering iCloud at all in UK. See how the blowback gets UK government to play ball and rollback the law. It may have hurt Apple in the short term but helped in the long term.
• connorgurney 2y ago
  Really disappointed that our government decided to take such a stance. What are people using when self-hosting services in the scope of iCloud nowadays? Nextcloud seems the closest comparable service.
  • alt227 2y ago
    If you own an iPhone then nothing can come close to the feature set of iCloud. Apple just have it on lockdown and dont expose the functionality that would be needed for a competitor to take advantage of this. A great time for all people to jump to android IMO and experience the freedom of choice it gives you.
• jiriknesl 2y ago
  I wonder, what are the alternatives now? Tresorit? Self-hosted Nextcloud?
  • fguerraz 2y ago
    There is no alternative really as only iCloud can back-up your settings, saved networks, and apps data. Other apps like Nextcloud, can only backup documents (those not in apps) and pictures, because there's an API for this. iTunes backup is an option, but it's not automatic and convenient.
    • dmix 2y ago
      It encrypts your entire phone backups as well
    • alt227 2y ago
      Is that true? Only iCloud can back up an iPhone? They dont provide any way to even extract an encrypted archive so you can keep it safe for yourself? I get more and more amazed at Apples lock in tactics. This is why I own nothing Apple, and have complete control over everything in my digital world.
      • SSLy 2y ago
        No, you can use iTunes to make a local backup too. It was a thing long before iCloud.
        • alt227 2y ago
          Fair enough, however iTunes is also Apple software no? So your choice is use Apple software to make your backups, or....?
          • SSLy 2y ago
            well, yeah, iphones could be bit more open, and I wish they were. But there's no real way for UK to force Apple into adding backdoors into that.
• lrdd 2y ago
  As a citizen, I don’t understand what the UK government thinks they are getting here - other than the possibility of leaks of the nation’s most sensitive data. Also is it not possible to set up my Apple account outside of the UK while living here?
  • world2vec 2y ago
    You need a valid payment method from that country and then cancel all current subscriptions and change to that new country/region.
    • chatmasta 2y ago
      btw, anyone know if this cancels Apple+ Support too? I’ve been resisting switching countries because I don’t want to lose that subscription since you can only subscribe within 60 days of device purchase.
    • mr_toad 2y ago
      You’ll probably want a method of downloading apps tied to the UK app store though - particularly banking apps.
  • GJim 2y ago
    > other than the possibility of leaks of the nation’s most sensitive data Amusing when you consider the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC, a part of GCHQ), along with the Information Commissioners Office, both publish guidance recommending, and describing how to use, encryption to protect personal and sensitive data. Our government is almost schizophrenic in its attitude to encryption.
    • Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
      That's because GCHQ knows they can kill if you refuse to decrypt so they have no problem suggesting it to you.
    • gjsman-1000 2y ago
      Correct me if I'm wrong here, and maybe this is too charged for HN, but looking over at you guys from the US: The US has problems (don't get me wrong, look at our politics, enough said); but the UK seems to be speedrunning a collapse. The NHS having patients dying in hallways; Rotherham back in the popular mind; a bad economy even by EU standards; a massive talent exodus (as documented even on HN regarding hardware engineers); a military in the news for being too run down to even help Ukraine; and most relevant to this story - the government increasingly acting in every way like it is extremely paranoid of the citizens. Any personal thoughts?
• world2vec 2y ago
  I regret immensely not having turned ADP before... Now I'm feeling really angry at this whole thing.
  • matthewdgreen 2y ago
    The best time to turn on ADP was before this happened. For folks not in the U.K., the second best time is right now. The more people who use it, the more disruptive it will be to turn off. Keep in mind there are some risks with any E2EE service! You’ll need to store a backup key or nominate a backup contact, and there’s a risk you could lose data. Some web-based iCloud services don’t work (there is a mode to reactivate them, with obvious security consequences.) for what it’s worth, I’ve been using it for well over a year (including one dead phone and recovery) and from my perspective it's invisible and works perfectly.
  • dmix 2y ago
    Here's how: On iPhone or iPad Open the Settings app. Tap your name, then tap iCloud. Scroll down, tap Advanced Data Protection, then tap Turn on Advanced Data Protection. Follow the onscreen instructions to review your recovery methods and enable Advanced Data Protection. On Mac Choose Apple menu  > System Settings. Click your name, then click iCloud. Click Advanced Data Protection, then click Turn On. Follow the onscreen instructions to review your recovery methods and enable Advanced Data Protection.
    • soraminazuki 2y ago
      Unfortunately, the title says > Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row
      • dmix 2y ago
        Only in the UK, everyone else should still do it. Not on by default
        • grahamj 2y ago
• piyuv 2y ago
  This can set a dangerous precedent. Now why wouldn’t any country demand the same, basically eliminating Advanced Data Protection everywhere, making user data easily accessible to Apple (and therefore governments)?
  • JKCalhoun 2y ago
    Wait, are you saying the U.S. might demand the same? In the current political environment?
    • piyuv 2y ago
      UK is much smaller than US and they didn’t even fight this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • ziddoap 2y ago
    The choice was either eliminate it now (globally, via introduction of a backdoor) or eliminate it in the UK (but keep it globally). So, perhaps this is a bit of a dangerous precedent, but it was the least-bad option.
    • piyuv 2y ago
      When UK demanded a backdoor to e2ee in iMessage, Apple told them they’d rather get out of UK. Why not do the same here? You’re posing a false dichotomy.
      • ziddoap 2y ago
        What would that change, effectively, other than have Apple lose money? The UK would still lose ADP (and then also just Apple products in general). A precedent would still be set. Your posing a strictly worse third option. Sure, it's an option, I guess. Apple could also just close down globally, as a fourth option. Or sell off to Google as a fifth. But I was trying to present the least-bad option (turn off ADP), rather than an exhaustive list.
        • 2y ago
• declan_roberts 2y ago
  I don't get what's happening to civil liberty in Europe.
  • GJim 2y ago
    Pot, meet kettle! Frankly, our democracies are currently in a rather precarious state.
  • vroomvroomboom 2y ago
    Nothing is happening to it. Governmental overreach, and then if people really want encryption they will vote in privacy-friendly officials. Here in Oregon, USA, we have Ron Wyden, who knows more about netsec than most IT graduates. As long as you can vote there is still civil liberty, just vote for the right people who care about this stuff.
    • thenaturalist 2y ago
      None of what you just said translates to any European country. None. Executive power is very representative, not direct, with the sole exception imo being Switzerland?
  • doublerabbit 2y ago
    This was Brexits doing. As we are no longer EU, we have our own cool rules such as the upcoming PM allowed to watch me take a piss law.
    • zimpenfish 2y ago
      > This was Brexits doing. Not really? We've had horrors like the 2000 RIP[0] well before Brexit. The Blair government made a huge dent in civil liberties and the Tories carried it on. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Po...
      • Jigsy 2y ago
• thraway3837 2y ago
  Could moves like this by other repressive regimes finally open the door to consumer-owned, consumer-controlled, decentralized cloud storage systems that are fully encrypted and inaccessible by any agency or individual except by the owner? Would be a beautiful thing to see. Not sure how storage would work though since you cannot take payment (that would make it centralized), and storage would have to be distributed, but by who?
  • zimpenfish 2y ago
    > inaccessible by any agency or individual except by the owner? I believe the UK already has "you must unlock anything we ask" as part of the RIP/2000[0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Po...
• herf 2y ago
  Why is there only one "iCloud" to backup your iPhone and store photos? Lots of ADP users would use a corporate or self-hosted solution instead.
  • nobankai 2y ago
    The reason is that Apple was never required by UK law to offer any alternative. I think the DSA intended to challenge that, but it would do nothing for UK residents.
  • arccy 2y ago
    because Apple privacy is just marketing, they just want you to pay for it, they don't really care if it's possible to do better for free / by others
  • snowwrestler 2y ago
    As far as I know you can still opt to backup your entire iPhone to a local computer instead of iCloud. You can also manually transfer photos to the computer. Or you can enable a different app (Google Photos or Dropbox for example) to store copies of every picture you take, and then turn off iCloud Photos. Note that neither Google nor Dropbox are E2E encrypted either though.
    • varispeed 2y ago
      What would you recommend as a DIY method? I have a NAS that is accessible through VPN. But I don't trust its encryption, thought it is in my controlled location.
      • spacedcowboy 2y ago
        Doing it locally doesn't really help. The RIP bill can force you to disclose your own encryption keys to the UK government, and if you "forgot them" you can be put in jail as if you were convicted of whatever they're accusing you of. That's why cloud backup was useful. [edit: actually I mis-remembered this, it's "only" 2 years (or 5 if it's national-security-related) that they'll jail you for. "Only" carrying a lot of water there...]
• vroomvroomboom 2y ago
  It's the right decision. Don't bow to the government, let the people demand it from their leaders, and vote in new ones.
  • v3xro 2y ago
    Yes, countries lacking in proportional representation and having obscure procedures like proroguing parliament are the best at listening to important but fairly obscure issues from their voters. </s>
• v3xro 2y ago
  Very disappointed with this, but I think will be finding alternatives. Family sharing especially of Reminders is a hard one - we use lists for grocery shopping and it is extremely convenient. Has anyone tried out Ente https://ente.io/ https://ente.io/ for photos?
• b800h 2y ago
  What happens if you're an international traveller?
  • SXX 2y ago
    This will likely depend on your primary account region. Apple can't just turn off E2EE on existing account nilly willy.
    • A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
      << Apple can't just turn off E2EE on existing account nilly willy. If they are able to, then then can be compelled. Do you mean won't/wouldn't?
      • SXX 2y ago
        They can break a sync on server-side for your account. They can't disable it on device though.
        • int_19h 2y ago
          They control the software running on your device, and said software ultimately has access to the encryption keys stored there (subject to the usual hoops; e.g. it might need you to do a FaceID unlock first, but it's not like you aren't already doing that many times every day).
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      • buildbot 2y ago
        “Apple said it will issue additional guidance in the future to affected users and that it "does not have the ability to automatically disable it on their behalf."” From https://www.macrumors.com/2025/02/21/apple-pulls-encrypted-icloud-security-feature-uk/ https://www.macrumors.com/2025/02/21/apple-pulls-encrypted-i...
• tome 2y ago
  I'm confused. I thought iCloud was end-to-end encrypted anyway, and I've never heard of ADP before. Is ADP encryption at rest, whereas normal iCloud storage is only encrypted from the device to the server?
  • dmix 2y ago
    The only difference is Apple doesn't hold the encryption keys when you use ADP. In both cases it's encrypted in transit and at rest.
    • tome 2y ago
      TIL that Apple holds the keys to my iCloud encrypted data!
      • AlanYx 2y ago
        For most of it, yes. There are exceptions, e.g., Health and Keychain, for which Apple does not have the keys even without ADP enabled.
      • burnerthrow008 2y ago
        Yes, otherwise, how would the web interface (iCloud.com) work?
        • blitzar 2y ago
          Or account recovery
  • jamesmotherway 2y ago
    See the "Data categories and encryption" section: "The table below provides more detail on how iCloud protects your data when using standard data protection or Advanced Data Protection." https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651 https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651
• pyuser583 2y ago
  How does this affect me if I travel to the UK with an E2E encrypted IThing?
  • bananapub 2y ago
    not at all
• cgcrob 2y ago
  Removed all my stuff from iCloud about a month ago in preparation for this.
• ranger_danger 2y ago
  The beginning of the end. A sad day for Brits
• Jigsy 2y ago
  I don't like Apple, nor do I use any of their products, but as someone from the UK, I do respect them for doing this. Now if only the other companies who said they'd leave would grow a backbone...
• bArray 2y ago
  Too right, it was far more problematic than they ever made out. > The UK government's demand came through a "technical capability notice" under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), requiring Apple to create a backdoor that would allow British security officials to access encrypted user data globally. The order would have compromised Apple's Advanced Data Protection feature, which provides end-to-end encryption for iCloud data including Photos, Notes, Messages backups, and device backups. One scenario would be somebody in an airport and security officials are searching your device under the Counter Terrorism Act (where you don't even have the right to legal advice, or the right to remain silent). You maybe a British person, but you could also be a foreign person moving through the airport. There's no time limit on when you may be searched, so all people who ever travelled through British territory could be searched by officials. Let that sink in for a moment. We're talking about the largest back door I've ever heard of. What concerns me more is that Apple is the only company audibly making a stand. I have an Android device beside me that regularly asks me to back my device up to the cloud (and make it difficult to opt out), you think Google didn't already sign up to this? You think Microsoft didn't? Then think for a moment that most 2FA directly goes via a large tech company or to your mobile. We're just outright handing over the keys to all of our accounts. Your accounts have never been less protected. The battle is being lost for privacy and security.
  • SoftTalker 2y ago
    Your smartphone cannot be considered a private device. You as the owner don’t have sufficient control over its operating system and applications to ever make that claim.
    • bArray 2y ago
      In theory you have the likes of the PinePhone where you can run a full Linux kernel [1]. You could then use something like Waydroid to run Android apps [2]. I think the biggest concern is that many of the important apps are anti-emulation, for example banking apps and authentication apps. [1] https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone_pro/ https://pine64.org/devices/pinephone_pro/ [2] https://waydro.id/ https://waydro.id/
  • 2y ago
• chatmasta 2y ago
  Ugh. Is this by App Store country? Anyone know what happens if I already have it configured? I’m actually in US App Store region and sometimes switch to UK… I wonder if that would disable it.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• aSithLord 2y ago
  [dead]
• drcongo 2y ago
  Could any hackers on here now please hack the fuck out of UK government ministers please?
  • alecco 2y ago
    I doubt it would play out like you think.
• wackget 2y ago
  So instead of building a back door they're just completely removing the option to use E2E encryption altogether, thus making everything freely available to government by default? How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door?
  • wonderwonder 2y ago
    The UK requested the backdoor for all users, not just UK citizens.
  • mholt 2y ago
    No illusion of privacy.
  • roughly 2y ago
    They’re just pulling the feature in the UK. If they put in a back door, they’re pulling the feature for everyone.
  • ziddoap 2y ago
    >How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door? It's bad for the citizens of the UK and better for everyone else on the planet with an iPhone. UK citizens should be angry with their government, not Apple.
  • poisonborz 2y ago
    Much better than a false sense of security. Customers know what they get, and can choose other products instead of being confused or cheated.
  • incorrecthorse 2y ago
    It _is_ equivalent to a back door, that's the point. The UK demand can be accessed more rapidly and properly by disabling the feature than by implementing a backdoor, since it is the same thing.
  • varispeed 2y ago
    Many departments use iphones. I wonder how it will affect government security or government employees will be exempt?
• Eavolution 2y ago
  What are you actually supposed to do in the UK if you oppose this sort of thing to stop laws like this coming in? It feels like the government has been incredibly out of touch for the last number of years.
  • redox99 2y ago
    I would guess you'd vote a libertarian party.
    • Apfel 2y ago
      Probably the best on the civil liberties front are the Liberal Democrats (they were pretty good at quashing mandatory national ID cards back in the day, at least). That being said, they still have a lot of folk angry at them for allowing university fees to be introduced 15 years ago when they were in coalition government (a Tory policy!).
  • IneffablePigeon 2y ago
    Join the ORG for starters. Contact your MP. But yes, the number of people who care is small and so things will not change until it is large.
  • i2km 2y ago
    You get the hell out and emigrate. I did so last year. It's not going to get better chap
    • globular-toast 2y ago
      Where did you go?
  • nobankai 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • aqueueaqueue 2y ago
• wonderwonder 2y ago
  The UK wanted access to anyone's data. Not just UK citizens and then additionally added regulations forbidding apple to disclose this. UK is ~3-4% of apples income. While I appreciate Apples actions here, I wish they would make a real stand here and pull completely out of the UK.
  • talldayo 2y ago
    [dead]
  • mtrovo 2y ago
    I really wish they would sit down and negotiate this more openly. The silence from the other players is what really makes me uncomfortable. The fact that only Apple is making a stand against this ask is really scary.
    • wonderwonder 2y ago
      Agreed, the UK is speed running 1984 right in front of us.
      • kobieps 2y ago
        Only three (well, now four) mentions of 1984 in the comments tells you all you need to know
        • wonderwonder 2y ago
          sorry friend, I am actually not sure what you mean by this comment. Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing :) Apologies, probably my fault.
• ta8645 2y ago
  Free speech already under threat and now y'all are giving up the right of private communication too? For anyone cheering this on, do you honestly think this will only affect the "bad people", and you'll never have your own neck under the government's boot? Even if you trust the government today, what happens when your neighbors elect a government you disagree with ideologically?
  • pixxel 2y ago
    [dead]
  • talldayo 2y ago
    [dead]
  • multimoon 2y ago
    I don’t think anyone is cheering this on.
    • int_19h 2y ago
      Many people do, unfortunately, so long as it's framed as "only terrorists and pedophiles need encryption that cops can't break".
      • botanical76 2y ago
        How do we actually beat this narrative? I've been proposing a E2EE-based chat application to my friend, and they asked me a similar question: won't it just be rife with pedophiles? How can you make a platform that will be used to that means? I have strong views about privacy as a fundamental human right, but I don't know how to answer that question. I certainly don't want to make the world worse, but this feels like a lesser of two evils type of deal: either make it even harder to catch bad actors, such as child abusers, or make it plausible that your government take away your freedom forever.
        • pacifika 2y ago
• ohnoitsahuman 2y ago
  Let's vote Labor and Liberal to keep the UK from going fascist on our data. Oh wait....shit.
  • basisword 2y ago
    This was done under the Investigatory Powers Act which was brought in in 2016. Saying that Labour weren't exactly against it at the time. Point being snooping isn't left or right - they all love it.
  • switch007 2y ago
    Labour are not anti authoritarian. Often quite pro
  • b800h 2y ago
    The party most likely to cut this stuff out is Reform, although they'd probably be closer to ambivalent about it.
    • spacebanana7 2y ago
      I’m pretty sure Reform would scrap this stuff, given the belief their part of politics has been a victim of these laws. Also worth considering Lib Dem if you’re not into right wing politics- they did vote against the relevant investigatory powers act back in 2016.
    • JansjoFromIkea 2y ago
      UKIP/Brexit/Reform as a vehicle to hold large influence over politics from outside Westminster might. I would imagine the party's attitudes on a myriad of things would shift if they were in power though.
  • rvz 2y ago
    They got what they voted for and now that those voters are surprised? It's really hilarious to try to blame previous governments for such unpopular moves like this one. If Labour was any better, then they would never have used the Investigatory Powers Act to force Apple to take actions such as this. For those who thought Labour would never do this, should just admit that this move was done under Labour and they are no better than the Tories.
• ilumanty 2y ago
  What exactly can UK users do now? Turn off "backup iPhone to iCloud" and stop syncing notes?
  • greatgib 2y ago
    Time to leave Apple, to buy and use hardware and solutions that you really own and have control.
  • buildbot 2y ago
    If you have ADP, Leave it on and have them automatically delete it at some point? Otherwise yes. “Customers who are already using Advanced Data Protection, or ADP, will need to manually disable it during an unspecified grace period to keep their iCloud accounts, according to the report. Apple said it will issue additional guidance in the future to affected users and that it "does not have the ability to automatically disable it on their behalf."
  • GeekyBear 2y ago
    UK users can still perform an encrypted backup to their local PC or Mac.
• Jackknife9 2y ago
  I'm going to start purging anything I store on the cloud. I'm not doing anything illegal, but why does the government want to treat me like I am.
  • docmars 2y ago
    Indeed. Time to leave the panopticon!
• dsmurrell 2y ago
  disables apple cloud sync
• tw600040 2y ago
  Ok, I am not very technical. Can someone help me understand this. I don't have Advanced data Protection on. Does that mean UK Gov can see my data now?
  • itishappy 2y ago
    Potentially. It really just means your data is stored unencrypted, so anybody that has access to Apple's servers can access your data. I don't believe any government has open access to Apple's servers, but they can get a warrant.
    • tw600040 2y ago
      I just realized ADP is not same as Lockdown mode. which Apple mentioned that only people that are likely to be targets need to turn on. Now I don't see any reason why I shouldn't turn ADP on. Turning on now.
  • frizlab 2y ago
    They always could. With advanced data protection they could not. The law mandated to add a backdoor to allow the government to also see encrypted data (which made the encryption insecure by definition). Apple refused to comply so you don’t even have the option to encrypt your backups now.
  • tene80i 2y ago
    It means Apple has the encryption keys to your backed-up data. So they can, in theory, access it, if the UK Gov demands that they do. That might never happen to you, but with ADP it would have been impossible, because even Apple can't access it. See https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651 https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651
• Goleniewski 2y ago
  Think about it.. You don't even have to be an Apple user to be affected by this issue. If someone backs up their conversations with you to apple cloud, your exchange is now fair game. You get no say in it either. We all lose.
  • noahjk 2y ago
    Very similar to sites like LinkedIn, which ask you to share your personal info & contact list. I don't want to share my contact details, but the second someone I know decides to opt in, I lose all rights to my own data as they've shared it on my behalf. Maybe they have other info, such as birthday, home address, other emails or phone #s, etc. stored for me, which is all fair game, as well.
    • folmar 2y ago
      If you are in EU, request your data be redacted.
  • freeqaz 2y ago
    That's why it's important to use apps like Signal where you can set the retention of your messages. I've got everybody I know using it now!
    • madeofpalk 2y ago
      Given historical backups are the norm here, retention only does so much. Really, apps should encrypt their own storage with keys that aren't stored in the backups. That's how you get security/privacy back.
      • cma 2y ago
        Many people want control over whether they back up conversations with others, and think it would be crazy for sender to control the retention policy instead of receiver. I think sender should just be able to send a recommended preference hint on retention and you could have an option to respect it or not.
• ComputerGuru 2y ago
  Note that this doesn’t satisfy the government’s original request, which was for worldwide backdoor access into E2E-encrypted cloud accounts. But I have a more pertinent question: how can you “pull” E2E encryption without data loss? What happens to those that had this enabled? Edit: Part of my concern is that you have to keep in mind Apple's defense against backdooring E2E is the (US) doctrine that work cannot be compelled. Any solution Apple develops that enables "disable E2E for this account" makes it harder for them to claim that implementing that would be compelling work (or speech, if you prefer) if that capability already exists.
  • madeofpalk 2y ago
    When you disable ADP, your local encryption keys are uploaded to Apple's servers to be read by them. Apple could just lock you out of iCloud until you do this.
    • oakesm9 2y ago
      That’s exactly the plan. Anyone with this enabled in the UK will need to manually disable it or they’ll get locked out of their iCloud account after a deadline.
      • pacifika 2y ago
        And I guess Apple gets fined for not allowing government approved alternatives to these services not long after.
    • kbolino 2y ago
      The hardware will not allow this, at least not without modifications. The encryption keys are not exportable from the Secure Enclave, not even to Apple's own servers.
      • sureIy 2y ago
        Are you gonna unlock that phone anytime soon? Thanks for opening the enclave, don't mind if I ship these keys back home. No notification needed, Apple has root access.
• yapyap 2y ago
  yikes
• DataOverload 2y ago
  This was predictable vs creating a backdoor
• mynameyeff 2y ago
  Yikes... looks like Apple sun is setting. This cannot be allowed to happen.
  • HPsquared 2y ago
    It's not just an Apple thing. It's not even just a UK thing.
• throwaway77385 2y ago
  The nightmare continues. For now I am using 3rd party backup services that are (currently) promising me that my backups are encrypted by a key they do not have access to, or control over. But can this even be believed in an age where these secret notices are being served to any number of companies? I suppose the next step would be to ensure that files don't ever arrive in the cloud unencrypted, but I have yet to see a service that allows me to do this with the same level of convenience as, say, my current backup solution, which seamlessly backs up all my phones, my family members' phones, my laptops, their laptops etc. I depend on having an offsite backup of my data. Which inevitably includes my clients' data also. Which I am supposedly keeping secret from outside access. So how does that work once everything becomes backdoored?
  • nemomarx 2y ago
    security and convenience are ever at war.
  • grahamj 2y ago
    IMO the only thing you can have a high level of trust in is your own *nix server. Backup those devices to it then encrypt there before being sent to the cloud.
    • acuozzo 2y ago
      > your own *nix server Just be sure it's pre-Intel Management Engine / pre-AMD Platform Security Processor!
    • JohnFen 2y ago
      Handling the encryption yourself is the way to go, but for maximum security, don't send that encrypted data to the cloud. Keep it all on your own server(s). That doesn't help people who aren't technically capable, of course. But at least those who are can protect themselves.
      • cg5280 2y ago
        Why couldn't the government just get a warrant and take your local servers? At that point there doesn't seem to be much of a difference with respect to this threat model, at least cloud is convenient.
• jcarrano 2y ago
  The smartphone is a terrible platform. Something like this could never happen on the PC, where you can install any encryption and backup software that you want. While Apple did the right thing by refusing to give the UK government a backdoor, they are responsible for getting users in this situation in the first place. I'm not familiar with the iPhone and maybe there is already an alternative to iCloud ADP, although that would make this whole situation completely nonsensical.
  • snowwrestler 2y ago
    I haven’t checked lately but since it launched the iPhone has allowed the owner to choose whether to back up to Apple’s servers (which would be affected by the UK order) or back up to their local computer.
    • inetknght 2y ago
      > or back up to their local computer. You mean back up to their Apple computer, yes? I certainly can't back up an iPhone to my Linux computer.
      • sumuyuda 2y ago
        Actually I think you can backup and restore your iPhone on Linux using libimobiledevice. They reverse engineered the protocols for the backup and restore service running on your iPhone. https://libimobiledevice.org/ https://libimobiledevice.org/
    • int_19h 2y ago
      It's not an either-or, actually, even though the setting is worded like it is. But even if you have cloud backups enabled, you can still manually trigger a local backup.
  • inetknght 2y ago
    > Something like this could never happen on the PC, where you can install any encryption and backup software that you want. Microsoft wants to have a word with you regarding their Windows operating system that's installed on their device that you're renting.
• fjjjrjj 2y ago
  Does this mean I should treat travel to the UK the same way as China and only bring a burner device with no information on it or on cloud backup accounts?
  • gnfargbl 2y ago
    Border control agents in all countries -- including the US -- have fairly extensive powers to search your devices or deny you entry. I'm not sure this decision should change your calculus on that point. See also https://medium.com/@thegrugq/stop-fabricating-travel-security-advice-35259bf0e869 https://medium.com/@thegrugq/stop-fabricating-travel-securit...
    • fjjjrjj 2y ago
      Company trade secrets probably shouldn't be on the device? Edit - or the device's cloud backups?
• tene80i 2y ago
  I have a naive question, and it's genuine curiosity, not a defence of what's happening here. This ADP feature has only existed for a couple of years, right? I understand people are mad that it's now gone, but why weren't people mad _before_ it existed? For like, a decade? Why do people treat iCloud as immediately dangerous now, if they didn't before? Did they think it was fully encrypted when it wasn't? Did people not care about E2E encryption and now they do? Is it that E2E wasn't possible before? If it's such a huge deal to people now, why would they have ever used iCloud or anything like it, and now feel betrayed?
  • writtenAnswer 2y ago
    I think it is more about going backwards. It is often difficult to remove laws than to add them. This is a similar situation. In this situation, I agree that it is bad day for personal privacy/security
  • RenThraysk 2y ago
    Think most people had no idea how it worked, it was magic to them. iCloud hacks (like in 2014) have raised awareness for the need for E2EE.
  • Shank 2y ago
    I guess I'm one of the people who was upset that it didn't exist before, and I didn't enable iCloud Backup as a result. I didn't use iCloud Photos. I had everything stored on a NAS (which was in-fact encrypted properly) and used a rube goldberg-esque setup to move data to it periodically. I used iMazing and local encrypted backups on a schedule. Lots of people called for E2EE on this stuff, but let's be real about one thing: encryption as a feature being more accessible means more people can be exposed to it. Not everyone can afford a rube goldberg machine to backup their data to a NAS and not make it easily lost if that NAS dies or loses power. It takes immense time, skill, and energy to do that. And my fear isn't the government, either, mind you. I simply don't trust any cloud service provider to not be hacked or compromised (e.g., due to software vulnerability, like log4j) on a relatively long timescale. It's a pain to think about software security in that context. For me, ADP solves this and enables a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise be protected from cloud-based attacks to be protected. Sure, protection against crazy stuff like government requests is a bonus, but we've seen with Salt Typhoon that any backdoor can be found and exploited. We've seen major exploits in embedded software (log4j) that turn out to break massive providers. So, there were people upset, their concerns were definitely voiced on independent blogs and random publications, and now, we're back in the limelight because of the removal of the feature for people in the UK. But, speaking as a user of ADP outside of the UK, I am happy that ADP is standing up for it, and thankful that it exists. (To be clear: government backdoors, and government requests also scare me, but they aren't a direct threat to myself as much as a vulnerability that enables all user data to be viewed or downloaded by a random third-party).
• fdb345 2y ago
  How will they enforce this? They will have to send out messages 'You have 32465 hours before you account is deleted unless you decrypt' This is NOT a good look.
• blindriver 2y ago
  [flagged]
• perdomon 2y ago
  Can someone explain what's changed in the UK that they would consider requesting unfettered access to all Apple customer data (including outside their own borders)? I get that the NSA is infamous for warrant-less surveillance, but this seems a step further.
  • varispeed 2y ago
    Uncontrolled immigration and terrorist threat, but also probably they want to look at people's nudes. Jolly lot.
  • chippiewill 2y ago
    Nothing's changed, they just want the same access to people's data they've always had. They loved completely unencrypted text messages. The rise of first-party end-to-end encryption has made life difficult for the security services so they just want to get rid of it. Also historically the US government loved the UK doing all this spying because the US wasn't allowed to do a lot of it on their own citizens.
  • r00fus 2y ago
    This is part and parcel of the collapse of western capitalism (aka American empire). You get two main choices when capitalism fails - fascism or communism/socialism. It's clear that the UK has chosen fascism (either liberals like Labor or extreme right like Reform).
    • dumbledoren 2y ago
      That choice exists only in cases in which the people can effect a revolution. The UK elite is too strongly in control of the country through its establishment, so, it will be a loud tumble down the hillside towards fascism...
  • crimsoneer 2y ago
    This isn't warrant-less, it's with a warrant. This isn't really a change the UK, it's the UK trying to adapt to the proliferation of E2E encryption - ten years ago, law enforcement could always access your messages, now the default if you're on whatsapp/iMessage is they can't because E2E is on by default. UK lawmakers aren't happy with a default position of the state being totally incapable of reading messages, no matter what the law says. It might not be cryptographically sensible, but it is responding to a real change in the strength of the state.
• kouru225 2y ago
  I’m at the point where I’m ready to get a pixel and install graphene
  • varispeed 2y ago
    Until it will be illegal to do so.
  • noescgchq 2y ago
    Right but then you are jailed at Heathrow for not unlocking your phone. The UK has made it clear that Counter Terrorism legislation has no limits in UK law even if that means compromising all systems and leaving them vulnerable to state actor attacks. MPs will continue to use encrypted messaging systems that disappear messages during any inquiries of course.
    • sangnoir 2y ago
      Schiphol was already the superior airport for connections anyway, not being arrested just sweetens the deal.
    • shaky-carrousel 2y ago
      You can provide a self destroy PIN with GrapheneOS.
      • runjake 2y ago
        And that certainly wouldn't raise their suspicion. Surely, they'd immediately let you go after that stunt.
        • dclowd9901 2y ago
          But it would be up to him, wouldn't it? I think that's the main deal here: cart blanche access to your data, or giving into someone's bullshit fishing attempt because it's inconvenient.
        • shaky-carrousel 2y ago
• andyjohnson0 2y ago
  Presumably this applies to the iPhones owned by UK government ministers, civil servants, personal devices of military personnel, UK businesses, etc. As a brit, I find that my government's stupidity is almost its only reliable attribute.
  • mrweasel 2y ago
    Presumably not, politicians have a way of excepting themselves in these types of laws. It's almost as if they understand the need for privacy, they just fail to apply that understanding to any scenarios beyond their own.
    • andyjohnson0 2y ago
      I meant that Apple's decision to withdraw ADP applies to them, not the Investigatory Powers Act. Or are you saying that Apple will give them a free exemption?
      • bigyabai 2y ago
        If any of them have something to hide, every single one of them could buy and operate a secure alternative. So fundamentally speaking, yes, they have exemption with or without Apple's assent.
    • fdb345 2y ago
      "Presumably not" Rubbish. Give me one example? They will have to abide as well.
      • 8fingerlouie 2y ago
        Not a UK example, but Chat Control (2.0) explicitly exempts various politicians and government officials from being spied on.
• santiagobasulto 2y ago
  What happens if a British citizen/resident buys an iPhone in the USA? Btw, as a European citizen, I always buy my devices in the USA. We can complain about the US as much as we want, but Europe is on another level.
  • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    As an EU citizen, the US* (govts) can stay way from my stuff. I won't even vpn through the *or any other gubments. Of course, when the rubber truncheon comes out, I'd be happy to show my encrypted stuff. But until then, or without a warrant, I'd prefer not to.
  • commandersaki 2y ago
    I think the iCloud services is based on the region of your Apple Account. So you could theoretically use a US region Apple Account and enjoy iCloud services. But that means you won't get UK region apps, except in the app store you can switch to different Apple Accounts as you please, so you can have multiple accounts for different regions (which is what I do).
• Ruq 2y ago
  Honestly I'm surprised that rather than trying to build stupid backdoors and such, tyrannical governments don't just try to make a encryption key database. They hold ALL the keys and can get into anything they want, anytime they want. If you get caught with keys or encrypted data they can't access, punishment ensues. Like if you're gonna try to eliminate privacy and freedom, just be honest and open about your intentions.
• xyst 2y ago
  If you care about privacy and security of your data, you aren’t using public services from Apple or Google, or “big tech” anyways. I always thought of “cloud” services to be a sham. I only trust them with transient data or junk data anyways (glorified temp storage, at best).
• j-bos 2y ago
  This law raises serious concerns about being a non UK resident using British software, like Linux Mint.
  • nobankai 2y ago
    No, it really does not.
    • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
      How can you definitively know?
      • nobankai 2y ago
        In the case of Linux Mint, I can check the commit history, build the software myself and even validate it against public checksums. It is expressly defended against these types of attacks, making it an odd choice to single out.
        • mihaaly 2y ago
          Isn't it already a law violation using it in certain scenarios? Or will be soon?
          • Aachen 2y ago
            No? Instead of speaking in question marks, why not link or reference the law or scenarios you're talking about?
            • mihaaly 2y ago
              You seriously need to re-learn what the concept of asking a question means! It looks like you were using it so long for passive agressive arguing that it lost its original meaning for you completely! I was asking.
• sumuyuda 2y ago
  Apple could have disabled iCloud completely for UK users. This would protect both UK users and other users who’s data would also been captured in an iCloud backup. They would lose some money on services, but would have been the better choice to stand up to the UK government and protect the UK users.
  • jdminhbg 2y ago
    It's fine to continue providing the service as long as people know it's not encrypted. I am not worried about my photos being subpoenaed; I am worried about losing them. I'd rather have the service.
• CodeWriter23 2y ago
  If Apple was a real American Company they would solve this issue by withdrawing their devices from the UK.
  • int_19h 2y ago
    Is Palantir a Real American Company?
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• nomilk 2y ago
  Wow - how sad. To think the 2nd highest scoring post ever on hacker news is Apple's 2016 A Message to Our Customers. A display of intelligence, morality and courage under great pressure: https://hn.algolia.com https://hn.algolia.com How things have changed. > In a statement Apple said it was "gravely disappointed" So are we, Apple. So are we.
  • okeuro49 2y ago
    Apple did the right thing. I would much rather they were transparent, so that people can move services, rather than build a backdoor in secret, to appease the far-left Labour government.
    • nomilk 2y ago
      Building a backdoor and telling us is better than building a backdoor and not telling us, but not building a backdoor at all is ideal.
    • stoobs 2y ago
      Oh stop with "far left" nonsense, none of our main political parties are much further than slightly left or right of centrist.
      • okeuro49 2y ago
        Bizarre statement. The far-left are so far-left, that they call everything center "far right".
• ljm 2y ago
  Fundamentally, I think the issue is more about technical literacy amongst the political establishment who consistently rely on the fallacy that having nothing to hide means you have nothing to fear. Especially in the UK which operates as a paternalistic state and enjoys authoritarian support across all parties. On the authoritarianism: these laws are always worded in such a way that they can be applied or targeted vaguely, basically to work around other legislation. They will stop thinking of the children as soon as the law is put into play, and it's hardly likely that pedo rings or rape gangs will be top of the list of priorities. On the technical literacy: the government has the mistaken belief that their back door will know the difference between the good guys (presumably them) and the bad guys, and the bad guys will be locked out. However, the only real protection is security by obscurity: it's illegal to reveal that this backdoor exists or was even requested. Any bad guy can make a reasonable assumption that a multinational tech company offering cloud services has been compromised, so this just paints another target on their backs. I've said it before, but I guarantee that the monkey's paw has been infinitely curling with this, and it's a dream come true for any black or grey hat hacker who wants to try and compromise the government through a backdoor like this.
  • elAhmo 2y ago
    > the government has the mistaken belief that their back door will know the difference between the good guys (presumably them) and the bad guys This is a very good point, and in the recent months we have been witnessing that people in government, or aiming to become the government, are definitely not the good guys. So, even if what they are asking would be limited to just governments (which it wouldn't), they can't claim they are the good guys anymore.
  • kmeisthax 2y ago
    What the politicians want is partial security: something they can crack but criminals can't. That is achievable in physical security, but not in cybersecurity. I have a feeling the politicians already know partial cybersecurity isn't an option, and don't care. Certainly, the intelligence community advising them absolutely does know. We don't even have to be conspiratorial about it: their jobs are easier in the world where secrets are illegal than in the world where hackers actually get stopped.
• freedomben 2y ago
  Devil's Advocate (meaning I don't agree with this, in fact I disagree with it, but I don't see this argument being made anywhere and think it would be interesting. If you're one of the people who are offended by this practice of people steel-manning "the other side" and only want to read comments that affirm your position, please don't read this comment). Question: Wouldn't it be better for Apple to build a UK-only encryption that is backdoored but is at least better than nothing? If Apple really cared about people's privacy, why just abandon them? My position: No because this is a war, not a battle. Creating a backdoored encryption would immediately trigger every government on the planet passing laws banning use of non-back-doored encryption, which would ultimately lead us to a much, much worse world. Refusing to do it is the right thing IMHO.
  • cat_meowpspsps 2y ago
    The UK's law here is specifically targetting encrypted data globally. > The UK government's demand came through a "technical capability notice" under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), requiring Apple to create a backdoor that would allow British security officials to access encrypted user data globally.
  • everfree 2y ago
    Without Advanced Data Protection, your data is still encrypted at rest, it's just that Apple safeguards the encryption key. The purpose of ADP is to remove control of this key from Apple, so that it's impossible for Apple to leak your data to any third party, even if they are compelled to. So to me, backdoor encryption seems like it defeats the whole point of ADP, no? But if not - even if there is some tiny marginal benefit - cryptography is extremely expensive to get right. It's doubtful that it makes financial sense to Apple to develop a new encryption workflow for a single country for very slight security benefits. And it still wouldn't be complying with the UK's demands anyways. The UK demanded access to accounts worldwide. If Apple is going to be non-compliant, then they might as well be non-compliant the easy way.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• nomilk 2y ago
  Wonder what the cost/benefit looks like from Apple's perspective. If this requirement increases the proportion of data on Apple's servers that is now unencrypted (or encrypted but which can be trivially unencrypted), that could be a huge plus to Apple; more data to use for ad targeting (or to sell to third parties), and more data to train AI models on.
• backyardflock 2y ago
  [flagged]
• smashah 2y ago
  Notice all the undemocratic dictatorships that did not require this of apple. The UK is in decline completely.
• Kim_Bruning 2y ago
  The current EU-UK adequacy decision[1] is up for review this 27 June [2] . Aspects of the UK investigatory powers act is close enough to US FISA [2] that I think this might have some influence, if brought up. IPA 2016 was known at the time of the original adequacy decision, but IPA was amended in 2024 . While some things might be improvements, the changes to Technical Capability Notices warrant new scrutiny. Especially seeing this example where IPA leads to reduced security is of some concern, I should think. The fact that security can be subverted in secret might make it a bit tricky for the EU to monitor at all. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32021D1773 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... [2] ibid. Article 4 [3] FISA section 702 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-110hr6304pcs/html/BILLS-110hr6304pcs.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-110hr6304pcs/html/...
• lucasRW 2y ago
  [flagged]
• cynicalsecurity 2y ago
  Could this have been a reason UK pushed to separation from the EU? EU is all for privacy while UK is slowly drifting towards becoming a Stasi state.
  • nickslaughter02 2y ago
    No, EU is NOT "all for privacy". I don't know where this myth comes from but I see it repeated here often. 1. EU is pushing for mandatory on-device scanning of all your messages (chat control). The current proposal includes scanning of all videos and images all the time for all citizens. The proposal started with analyzing all text too. The discussions are happening behind close doors. EU Ombudsman has accused EU commission of "maladministration", no response. 2. EU is allowing US companies to scan your emails and messages (ePrivacy Derogation). Extended for 2025. 3. EU is pushing for expansion of data retention and to undermine encryption security (EU GoingDark). "The plan includes the reintroduction and expansion of the retention of citizens’ communications data as well as specific proposals to undermine the secure encryption of data on all connected devices, ranging from cars to smartphones, as well as data processed by service providers and data in transit." https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/eugoingdark-surveillance-plan-timeline-agenda-background/ https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/eugoingdark-surveillance-pl... 4. EU is pushing for mandatory age verification to use email, messengers and web applications. Citizens will be required to use EU approved verification providers. All accounts will be linked back to your real identity. 5. "Anonymity is not a fundamental right": experts disagree with Europol chief's request for encryption back door (January 22, 2025) https://www.techradar.com/computing/cyber-security/anonymity-is-not-a-fundamental-right-experts-disagree-with-europol-chiefs-request-for-encryption-back-door https://www.techradar.com/computing/cyber-security/anonymity... ----- Do you still believe EU is all for privacy? EU's privacy is deteriorating faster than in any other developed country / bloc. Some of these proposals have been blocked by Germany for now but that is expected to change after the upcoming elections.
    • dumbledoren 2y ago
      < EU is pushing for mandatory on-device scanning of all your messages (chat control) Again and again, 'Eu' is not pushing anything like that. A few Euparl MPs backed by those like Ashton Kutcher did. > Eu isnt 'planning' anything like that. Some Euparl MPs backed by people like Ashton Kutcher tried to push a law to spy on all chat apps. Then when the dirty web of American-style regulatory manipulation was exposed, they backed off. It was a proposal for a law by some MPs. Not something 'Eu' did.
• adfm 2y ago
  It's a drag that we're seeing this crap happen, but authoritarians will be authoritarians. What's the general opinion of tools like Cryptomator? [^1] [^1]: https://cryptomator.org https://cryptomator.org
• nullbyte808 2y ago
  They should of forced ADP on by default and this would of never happened.
  • commandersaki 2y ago
    That would alienate users due to key management complexity. Apple is about having a smooth user experience.
    • blitzar 2y ago
      Apple processes multiple orders of magnitude more account recoveries for customers each day than receive government requests.
  • int_19h 2y ago
    The problem with that is that if the user loses their key, their account is no longer recoverable. As things are with ADP, enabling it comes with a bunch of warnings about that, and IIRC it also forces you to print out the recovery key for safe storage.
• IceHegel 2y ago
  I'm sympathetic to the J.D. Vance angle, which is that European governments are increasingly scared of their own people. This is not doing a lot to change my mind.
  • pathless 2y ago
    This unexpected news really cemented that point for him.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • Cornbilly 2y ago
    The unspoken part of that is Vance likely thinks that the people should fear their government.
    • bilbo0s 2y ago
      True. It's a very unwise position Vance takes. The world would clearly be better run if all governments feared their people, than it would if all people fear their governments. The UK can pull this kind of stuff precisely because they do not fear any consequences from their people.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • imperial_march 2y ago
      [dead]
    • buzzerbetrayed 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • Cornbilly 2y ago
        He likened Trump to Hitler and then ran with him. That reveals everything about Vance.
• als0 2y ago
  Is there a way for a UK iPhone to circumvent the warning and enable ADP? Like connecting through a VPN?
• mrandish 2y ago
  > Online privacy expert Caro Robson said she believed it was "unprecedented" for a company "simply to withdraw a product rather than cooperate with a government". > "It would be a very, very worrying precedent if other communications operators felt they simply could withdraw products and not be held accountable by governments," she told the BBC. Attributing this shockingly pro-UK-spy-agencies quote to an "online privacy expert" without pointing out she consults for the UN, EU and international military agencies is typical BBC pro-government spin. In fact, Caro, it would be "very, very worrying" if communications operators didn't withdraw a product rather than be forced to make it deceptive and defective by design.
• AlanYx 2y ago
  Many people might not be aware of it, but Apple publishes a breakdown of the number of government requests for data that it receives, broken down by country. The number of UK requests has ballooned in recent years: https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/gb.html#:~:text=77%25-,Device,Requests%20where%20Data%20Provided https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/gb.html#:~:text=77%... Much of this is likely related to the implementation and automation of the US-UK data access agreement pursuant to the CLOUD Act, which has streamlined this type of request by UK law enforcement and national security agencies.
  • sva_ 2y ago
    Looking at the ones for Germany, those seem like rookie numbers https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/de.html#:~:text=77%25-,Device,Requests%20where%20Data%20Provided https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/de.html#:~:text=77%...
    • AlanYx 2y ago
      It's also comparatively worse than the raw numbers suggest because the customer base of Apple phones in Germany is much smaller than in the UK.
      • crossroadsguy 2y ago
        I see numbers for USA and China very low as well. Maybe they don't have/need to request? ;-) Just saying.
        • Synaesthesia 2y ago
          In the UK and Germany people get arrested for social media posts. This doesn't really happen in the USA (or China, to my knowledge)
  • dvtkrlbs 2y ago
    The problem is AFAIK this act is a lot different and Apple or any party that gets this order is completely forbidden to talk about it. So these kind of requests would not show up in this transparency requests. It is IMHO fair to assume Apple will UK this backdoor given they chose to disable Advanced Data Encryption and public would have no insight to amount and reasons to the backdoor usage. It is really troubling.
• fdb345 2y ago
  Are anyone of you lot getting the realisation onto why they are pushing Passkeys so hard? They know they access 8 out of 10 phones they seize. DONT USE PASSKEYS
• butterknife 2y ago
  If you're in the UK, please consider signing the below petition. Thanks. https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/keep-our-apple-data-encrypted https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/keep-our-apple-data-e...
  • wrboyce 2y ago
    I never understand why people create petitions (targeted at the gov) on a non-official site.
    • Aachen 2y ago
      I'm not familiar with UK law, but what's the matter? They're equally valid in jurisdictions that I know of, a signature is a signature no matter where it was put I'd personally just trust the government variant more with my government ID data than a third party but that's up to the petitioners to weigh and decide
      • ljn 2y ago
        In the UK, there's an official gov site for petitions, such that when a petition has >10k signatures, a government minister is required to write a response, and >100k triggers a parliamentary debate, iirc. Whether the responses/parliamentary debates the person triggers end up being useful is up for debate.
• -__---____-ZXyw 2y ago
  Workers in tech jobs over the past few decades are the ones who are primarily to blame for the total degradation of the very notion of privacy, and our societies are, I think, reaping the consequences of this now in many ways. This story didn't spring up out of nowhere, like a monster from under the bed. It's been a gradual decline since, let's say, the 90s or so. I don't want to be vulgar, but the people who understood the best what was happening were mostly too busy taking large paychecks to get too upset about the whole thing. It got explained away, rationalised, joked about, and here we are.
  • mihaaly 2y ago
    Easier to push away the blame for a foot soldier, claiming to do things on orders or claiming to be absolutely f clueless where it leads, one is worse than the other. Thousands had to make this work and function as it is. Still, this is a different topic than the government use of law enforcement for preserving the shity situation that was built by the industry and its actors just when the trend becomes of fixing what was made to be crap, just when people want to correct the f up of the ignorant collaborants.
• ianopolous 2y ago
  If anyone’s looking for open-source, self-hostable, E2EE storage then checkout Peergos (disclaimer: lead here): https://peergos.org https://peergos.org
• cluckindan 2y ago
  The UK backdoor means US and other FVEY states are able to freely request any person’s private data from GCHQ.
• anoncow 2y ago
  >Online privacy expert Caro Robson said she believed it was "unprecedented" for a company "simply to withdraw a product rather than cooperate with a government. That is such a self serving comment. If Apple provides UK a backdoor, it weakens all users globally. With this they are following the local law and the country deserves what the rulers of the country want. These experts are a bit much. In the next paragraph they say something ominous. >"It would be a very, very worrying precedent if other communications operators felt they simply could withdraw products and not be held accountable by governments," she told the BBC.
  • rapjr9 2y ago
    This is actually an increasing concern, that large multinational companies are so powerful that they don't have to obey governments any more, and can instead blackmail them by withdrawing products. Pornhub has done this in US states. Meta has threatened to do it in various countries. There has always been pushback to regulation from powerful companies, but punishing countries by withdrawing products seems to be used as a tactic more often recently. There are other tools of power companies use as well, like deciding where to create jobs and build facilities. Musk has used that, moving from California to Texas. Defence and oil companies use these tactics also.
    • adultSwim 2y ago
      Google News pulling out of Spain..
    • anoncow 2y ago
      I disagree but respect your opinion. Companies have the right to free speech. In the tussle between regulators and companies, companies are disadvantaged. If we can force companies to do the regulators bidding and not allow them to use free speech to act in their best interests, we would have global tyranny. The regulators and companies both acting towards their own goals with freedom allows us to have a world with balance. I believe in this however I think we are testing limits of this approach with scenarios like the one with encryption. Ideally privacy needs E2E encryption. But concerns on misuse of such technology that governments raise are also not without merit. I wonder if this tussle between regulators and companies can end in any way in which privacy is not compromised. Mathematically it doesn't seem that there is a way to be safe and private.
• AutistiCoder 2y ago
  How many UK people who haven't heard of ADP will now enable it?
• SirMaster 2y ago
  Well this is double plus ungood...
• mmaunder 2y ago
  Not relevant to the Apple story but as a general comment on UK surveillance/search/detainment laws: Five Eyes means the US just needs to get their citizen into the UK for their partner to gain access that the US doesn't have to their citizen. The reciprocity possibilities are endless.
• ancorevard 2y ago
  Deep betrayal by Apple. "privacy is a fundamental human right" - Tim Cook.
• Zufriedenheit 2y ago
  Does Apple offer this type of encryption in China?
• edge17 2y ago
  Are there non-icloud backup options? There used to be local encrypted backups through itunes, but I can't tell if that feature is still around.
  • commandersaki 2y ago
    Still exists but now backup is integrated into Finder. You can also do encrypted backup on Windows but I forgot what the app is called (from Apple).
  • aqueueaqueue 2y ago
    ITunes but it is a PITA. Do a test backup restore too. It may not restore if the phone was nearly full (maybe 80%) when backed up.
• mattfrommars 2y ago
  Could this be the catalyst for the rise of third party encryption companies that operate in UK? Or perhaps, rise to third party self host E2E cloud solution? Only time will tell. I've already invested in USB storage :)
• ein0p 2y ago
  How do you like your "liberal democracy", UK-ians? Is that democratic enough for you yet? Do you feel in control?
• EGreg 2y ago
  Why can't governments simply compel every software developer to create a backdoor, or go to jail? If even one government does it, then the backdoors exist globally. Here is an overview of the global situation: https://community.qbix.com/t/the-global-war-on-end-to-end-encryption/214 https://community.qbix.com/t/the-global-war-on-end-to-end-en...
• sensanaty 2y ago
  Lol so much for the privacy-first Apple BS everyone keeps touting If they had any balls whatsoever they would've rejected this and pulled out of the UK, but of course money comes before anything else.
• cytocync 2y ago
  [dead]
• 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
  This provides an incentive for Apple computer users to do the right thing: Stop storing sensitive data on Apple servers. Unfortunately, due to Apple's pre-installed proprietary operating systems that phone home incessantly, that may be more challenging than it should be.
• keepamovin 2y ago
  They are not the first country to do this. Apples advanced security features are rolled out non-uniformly across global markets. You get different capabilities, depending on where you are and where your account is resident, it would be great if there was a website that listed the countries and the security protections Apple provides in those countries.
• reader9274 2y ago
  "Existing users' access will be disabled at a later date." Hmmm how? How can they decrypt your already end-to-end encrypted and uploaded data without you entering the passphrase to do so? I can understand them removing the data from iCloud completely, or asking you to send the keys to Apple, but I don't understand how they can disable the feature for already uploaded data.
  • mu53 2y ago
    I am going to say something a bit controversial around here, but all of this E2E and security stuff is just lip service for marketing to consumers. These companies have to comply with so many laws and want cozy relationships with governments, so they play both sides. It likely does things differently, but if the keys are not secure, then its not secured
  • Aloisius 2y ago
    They will lock UK users out of iCloud until they manually disable ADP. When a user turns off ADP in settings, their device uploads the encryption keys to Apple servers.
    • reader9274 2y ago
      What if the users don't agree to disable ADP? So if one pays for iCloud+, they'll be refunded? And what happens to their already uploaded data? Is it deleted?
      • Aloisius 2y ago
        I imagine if you choose to ignore the warning that iCloud syncing will cease to work unless you disable ADP, then at some point, the warning turns into an error and iCloud syncing will cease to work. I can't imagine they'll cancel your iCloud+ subscription. ADP is not a feature of iCloud+ and iCloud+ has features beyond extra storage space. Nor can I imagine they'll delete your data preemptively as long as there's space to store it. Hopefully they'll provide instructions on how to manually delete your iCloud data in case you don't want to use it any longer (I think you just turn off iCloud on all your devices).
• sneak 2y ago
  This is almost the status quo in the USA, given that nobody turns on the optional e2ee anyway.
• nisten 2y ago
  ok so while being AI safety concerned.. uk politicians go ahead and remove humanity's single logical control tool that they have to keep AI in check.. encryption maths. gg
• dk1138 2y ago
  The more I live I’m less concerned about what are often described as “bad actors”. The bad actors are often the state, and this kind of information is collected without thought to the risk of future politicians who don’t follow the rules or who don’t have any respect for the laws.
  • wcerfgba 2y ago
    States are not inherently good, they are just large organisations with a monopoly on certain social functions. All large organisations have the capacity to inflict terrible harm.
  • IceHegel 2y ago
    Through all history state security has been a thing. The Stasi and KGB are transparently state security forces to the West, but the CIA and MI5/6 are... what exactly? The primary purpose of these agencies, despite what has been written down on paper, is NOT to protect the citizens of the countries that fund them. It is to protect the system that taxes those citizens.
• ajdude 2y ago
  Related discussion: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts (washingtonpost.com) 762 points by Despegar 14 days ago | 1070 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42970412 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42970412
• willtemperley 2y ago
  What the UK government achieved: Lowering the data protection of it's citizens in comparison to the rest of the world. I was under the impression governments were supposed to protect their citizens.
  • arccy 2y ago
    the government's monopoly on force just means they're thugs most people tolerate...
  • bruce511 2y ago
    >> Lowering the data protection of it's citizens in comparison to the rest of the world. I was under the impression governments were supposed to protect their citizens. This depends on whether you see "citizens" as individuals or as a group. In other words it's possible that to improve the security (and thus protect) the majority, the rights of individual citizens need to be eroded. For example, to protect vulnerable citizens from crime (the cliche of child porn is useful here, but it extends to most-all crime) it's useful for prosecutors to be able to collect evidence against guilty parties. This means that the erosion of some privacy of those parties. Thus the govt balances "group security" with "individual privacy". It has always been so. So to return to your original hypothesis; >> Lowering the data protection of it's citizens in comparison to the rest of the world. ... and also, making it easier to detect and prosecute criminals, and thus protect the citizens from physical harm. Now, of course, whenever it comes to balancing one thing against another, there's no easy way to make everyone happy. We all want perfect privacy, coupled with perfect security. Some will say that they'll take more privacy, less security - others will take more security and less privacy. Where you stand on this issue of course depends on which side you lean. More fundamentally though there's a trust issue. Citizens (currently) do not trust governments. They assume that these tools can be used to harm more than just criminals. (They're not wrong.) If you don't trust the govt to act in good faith then naturally you choose privacy over security.
    • willtemperley 2y ago
      You restate my hypothesis adding your own words: "also, making it easier to detect and prosecute criminals, and thus protect the citizens from physical harm." Did this happen though? Whilst I agree with your philosophy, in reality the UK government are no closer to lawfully accessing our data, but our data are less protected from potential other threats (e.g. unlawful access to a data centre, rogue Apple employees). It's what actually happened as opposed to the government intention that matters to the people affected. So my statement "Lowering the data protection of it's citizens in comparison to the rest of the world" still stands, and I'd add "whilst the UK government achieved absolutely zero in its quest to lawfully access individual's data".
• LAC-Tech 2y ago
  At some point, we need to stop being surprised at authoritarian countries doing authoritarian things. Here's hoping the inevitable regime change will be a peaceful one.
• bigfatkitten 2y ago
  It's just a shame that Apple didn't include the contact details for the Home Office officials responsible as the place for inquires regarding the matter.
• codedokode 2y ago
  This is a good reminder that the one who cares about privacy and security cannot rely on closed-source products from commercial companies; don't be deceived by marketing slogans.
• 6510 2y ago
  Being locked into an ecosystem seems really nice. The problem is that you don't really know your future jailer.
• sholladay 2y ago
  So many questions around this that need answering, such as: 1. What happens if I have ADP enabled and then visit the UK? Will photos I take there still be E2E encrypted? If not, will I be notified? I realize that at the moment the answer is yes, that for now, they are only disabling ADP enrollment. But they are planning to turn it off for everyone in the UK in the future. So what happens then? 2. If they make an exception for visitors, such as by checking the account region, then obviously anyone in the UK who cares about security will just change their account region - a small inconvenience. Maybe this will be a small enough group that the UK government doesn’t really care, but it could catch on. 3. Is this going to be retroactive? It’s one thing to disallow E2E encryption for new content going forward, where people can at least start making different decisions about what they store in the cloud. It’s an entirely different thing for them to remove the protection from existing content that was previously promised to be E2E encrypted. When they turn off ADP for people who were already enrolled, how is their existing data going to be handled? This is bad news and it is going to be messy.
  • sureIy 2y ago
    These are important questions, particularly 2 because even a layover in London or Dublin puts you under UK jurisdiction. So now you have to put that into account when traveling. The precedent here is China. I spent a few days in China and, as far as I know, my region is still <other country> and ADP is still active.
    • biztos 2y ago
      How does a layover in Dublin put you in UK jurisdiction? I have seen advice in big companies to only take a burner phone when going to China on business. Perhaps the same will apply to the UK.
      • sureIy 2y ago
        > How does a layover in Dublin put you in UK jurisdiction? Heh that's embarrassing. Scratch that part.
• aryan14 2y ago
  Absolutely mental the kind of people that have power. Dealing with this like immature children. “We don’t get what we want? We ruin it for everyone.” Trying to backdoor a privacy feature for no real reason, just for the sake of having a backdoor. Pathetic
• blufish 2y ago
  its a shame
• retinaros 2y ago
  concessions afer concessions we gave away our freedom. the axis of good is mostly responsible for this but the opposition also wanted to remove anonymity and freedom from the web. no one fought when the democrats called snowden or assange russian spys for revealing clinton corruption. they just blindly sided with their own corrupt political party and gave away freedom. just like previous govs censored trump, banned political opponents they created a precedent and opened the door to the end of freedom. its now beyond politics, we should fight for the last moments of freedom we have before its too late.
  • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    ...you go first. I'll applaud, and call everyone else over, if anything interesting happens.
• vegabook 2y ago
  I live between France and the UK. How do I move my iCloud account out of Britain?
• QuiEgo 2y ago
  The cloud is just someone else’s computer. If you really, really care about privacy, self host.
  • AlgebraFox 2y ago
    That works for nerds like us. But my sister or my non tech friends don't have knowledge to self host. It is like asking a person to do a surgery on themselves when they don't have medical knowledge. E2E services are very crucial for such normal people. How long do you think for governments to make it illegal to self host or backdoor Linux builds? They have already went too far by just asking backdoor to data of every single person on the planet. We should oppose such unethical laws rather than finding workarounds.
    • QuiEgo 2y ago
      > How long do you think for governments to make it illegal to self host or backdoor Linux builds? Probably never, it won't be worth the trouble because it's always going to be a fringe thing for the reasons you say :). One can hope anyways. Also, if the government decides I'm a baddie, they can always just show probable cause to a judge and come physically get my hardware, so they have a more traditional path there to handle weirdos like me already :). FWIW, I agree completely strong encryption in SAAS is necessary for privacy. But pragmatically, there's little hope laws like this won't eventually take root in more places. So the statement stands irregardless of the challenges: the cloud is just someone else's computer. One final note: I don't think E2E means what most people think it means unfortunately - lots of companies imply that you're the only one with access to the encryption keys when E2E is on, but if you read the fine print, it often really just says is the data is encrypted in flight, not what the policy is for protecting the data on the other "end." This is the awesome thing about ADP - they spell out the full policy in glorious detail.
  • Aachen 2y ago
    For those to whom that sounds scary: buy a regular consumer NAS. They run quite a few applications nowadays (besides being file storage as a base feature) and are meant to be setuppable by an average person
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• MagicMoonlight 2y ago
  They keep asking for more and more ridiculous powers, but then someone on a terrorist watchlist will go and stab a bunch of toddlers. They don’t need more powers, they need to just do their jobs.
• uni_baconcat 2y ago
  Write to local MP and Home Office. This is totally unacceptable.
• rhubarbtree 2y ago
  As a British citizen I am amazed at how much the government has invaded our privacy. I think it started after 9/11 when they first introduced terrorism laws and saw they could get away with it. I wonder if the ruling classes are nervous, given the state and direction of our economy and the inequality, as well as the iron grip a small part of the country has maintained on society. They are perhaps making preparations for a class revolt. Having said that, in practice to date the extraordinary powers the government has acquired are rarely used, eg to quell the race riots last year. It feels more like a risk for the future and that makes it harder to argue against now. One day this will hit the fan. I’m very curious, however, to see Americans criticise our government for its (mostly theoretical) overreach, whilst simultaneously the constitution of America is being torn to shreds by the actions of Musk and Trump, with some in the tech community even cheering on DOGE.
  • yew 2y ago
    Hm. I see them as connected - "we must confront our problems domestically before we fight them abroad."
    • rhubarbtree 2y ago
      Please could you expand? I'm very confused by what's going on in the states, particular the attitude in the tech community, so any clarity would be appreciated!
      • yew 2y ago
        Not particularly. The matter is no longer up for discussion. Silence and action are best.
        • yew 2y ago
          (Unsafety and fear always motivate silence and action. You might expect certain people to understand that better than most.)