4 ms·
>The issue with Apple caving to UK demands regarding encryption Apple "caving" would've looked different; in fact, we probably never would have known, given th
by ubermonkey 2y ago
>The issue with Apple caving to UK demands regarding encryption
Apple "caving" would've looked different; in fact, we probably never would have known, given the insidious nature of the underlying statute in the UK.
Apple is making noise about the fact that they pulled the product, and the tech press is making it clear WHY even though Apple itself is legally prohibited from giving any additional context.
I feel like that was probably the best move available to them given the cards dealt. Fighting in secret courts is unlikely to be fruitful.
- louwrentius 2y agoRemoving the advanced encryption option for new accounts is really 'caving' to the demands of the government in my view. And in time, they will also remove the e2e encryption on existing accounts using the e2e feature to comply with UK demands. They may have sounded the alarm, which I appreciate, but they still have to 'cave' and do as the UK government tells them or they have to cease operations in the UK.
- ubermonkey 2y agoWhat I'm really noting here is that Apple had no good options. Capitulating would've meant giving the UK government the back door they wanted. They didn't do that. They complied in a loud and public way, which unmistakably shined a light on the insane request. The only other options for them were withdrawal from the UK market entirely, or a secret court fight they'd probably lose. To me, their actual response reads more like malicious compliance than "caving," which usually implies giving up completely.