19 ms·
Apple takes UK to court over 'backdoor' order
- ohgr 2y agoI am very glad they are doing this as a UK based ADP user. Waiting to see how long before they forcibly turn it off for existing users. I will of course just remove everything from iCloud at that point.
- kennysoona 2y agoIt's not like you can use an alternative without facing jail time if you don't give up the keys.
- ben_w 2y agoThat's still a big improvement. A backdoor can be exploited by criminals who want personal gain, not just used as intended by police.
- ohgr 2y agoIndeed. But you can of course say "show me the court order" and defend yourself.
- kennysoona 2y agoIs a court order explicitly needed in the UK to demand a key?
- OsrsNeedsf2P 2y agoNot in the UK. In fact there's precedence they can arrest you for not unlocking your devices, without a warrant[0] [0] https://www.independent.co.ug/activist-convicted-uk-terror-offence-refusing-unlock-phone/ https://www.independent.co.ug/activist-convicted-uk-terror-o...
- ohgr 2y agoThey can arrest you for anything. I’ve been arrested twice. And questioned once. And apologised to twice.
- 77pt77 2y agoapologised?! Surely you're joking! No way that really happened or it was an empty apology like. > I'm sorry you made yourself suspicious
- Braxton1980 2y agoHe didn't even explain why he was arrested or what he was suspected of
- ohgr 2y agoFirst time I was arrested for being next to a fight until I was cleared of any involvement. This required some explaining and the policeman was an idiot. Second time some busybody reported to the police that I was carrying a knife. This was a Santoku knife that I'd literally bought and was still in the plastic packaging but you could see it through the plastic bag I was carrying it in. We had a bit of a laugh about it and they apologised for wasting my time. They did however arrest me so that they could do a formal search and had right to as they had reasonable suspicion I was carrying it as a weapon. I'm not bothered they were very reasonable and so was I.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- 2y ago
- gambiting 2y agoIf you are stopped at the border then you don't have such a right. British border force can just demand you give them keys to all your devices and hold them for 7 days, no court order needed. Watch this if you're curious how that looks like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=991kRp8KUmo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=991kRp8KUmo
- lucb1e 2y agoThe part that stood out to me, copying from the automatic transcript: > they're sitting there with these like blank A4 Bits of Paper writing down everything I'm telling them like you know bits of interest and it's exactly the same thing the Russians did when they interrogated me [...] to be honest interactions with the Russians have been pretty much the same as inter with the British government I didn't do my research before going to the UK for the first time two months ago and just went with my gut feeling, that is, deleting files from my phone that I don't want to end up in a government system through Cellebrite's "accelerated justice" or whatnot. Never done this for any other country before (I cross borders on a weekly basis). Seeing this video and the Ugandan article from the sibling comment, that was definitely the right move
- Marsymars 2y agoI don’t know of any country where border guards don’t have the authority to seize your device if you’re trying to cross. I just use devices with ephemeral storage for crossing borders to save myself from having to do any research on any particular country’s device privacy practices.
- lucb1e 2y agoThen I'm not sure what we're criticizing China for, if no country has such fundamental rights for the people under its control. The warrant system exists for a reason. I'm not more likely to be carrying something illegal when going between countries than within the jurisdiction where my registered place of residence is; less if anything because there might be spot checking indeed
- 2y ago
- cpressland 2y agoThis is correct - but I’d rather my law enforcement had a pre-existing reason to investigate me rather than just stumbling upon something in random hidden searches. Innocent until proven guilty is key here. I have nothing to hide, but I’m still not giving you access to my photo library.
- Braxton1980 2y ago[flagged]
- willk 2y agoBecause they can.
- Braxton1980 2y agoSo they randomly picked a person to search?
- reaperducer 2y agoNever been across an international border?
- yreg 2y agoSpeaking of which, iOS needs to finally support user accounts, ideally hidden ones as well.
- ethagnawl 2y agoThey have a jealous ex who is a LEO.
- bdamm 2y agoYou seem to think that the indexing and searching happens only if there is a reason. Why do you think that? There are all kinds of cases where government agents were found to have abused access to data for reasons that had nothing to do with illegal or immoral behavior by a target.
- PaulRobinson 2y agoThe penalty for not giving up keys is max 2 years in prison. Most offences that they're trying to use the encrypted data to use as prosecution evidence (for example, child pornography), have penalties that are way more than 2 years in prison. If you're genuinely innocent, the 2 years is horrid. If you're actually guilty, it's a cheap way to serve your time. It's a weird and perverse law that shouldn't exist, but it's likely in time the government will need to move the needle one way or the other, as habitual criminals are getting used to doing the maths.
- llm_trw 2y agoThis comes up every time someone wants to give the death penalty for rape. If the punishment for rape is harsher than the punishment for murder than anyone committing it may as well remove the evidence by using a blender.
- robocat 2y agoIs there a academic study of the heuristic of choosing between option A versus option B? People (even criminals) are not perfectly economic thinkers. That's probably a good thing. I have this terrible thought of a quant rapist: juggling their risk that the victim stays quiet or otherwise acts (police or revenge). Deciding on the Kelly Criterion for losing 20 years in prison. I'd watch a movie about a killer using statistics properly. It is annoying when muderers are cast as being idiots. I imagine the protagonist runs a hedge fund and gets bored of getting away with white collar crime.
- chii 2y ago> People (even criminals) are not perfectly economic thinkers. That's probably a good thing. why is that a good thing? Perfect economic thinkers are good, because they'd be predictable and can be reasoned with. Providing economic incentives to such means you can direct behaviour in an easy and efficient way. Irrational thinkers cannot be reasoned with via economic rationality. Therefore, either you have to stack the incentives so high that the cost becomes overbearing, or you use some other means of control that's less nice.
- teekert 2y agoReally? So you can have your own Nextcloud server, connect over Tailscale and you’d face jail-time? I can’t imagine that.
- kennysoona 2y agoThe law is about making sure the UK government has access to your encrypted data if they want it. It doesn't only apply to big corporate solutions.
- teekert 2y agoWtf. What is next, my thoughts? Who are these people? Thinking they can outlaw basic maths operations.
- DeepSeaTortoise 2y agoLook up "decolonize math" or "critical mathematics".
- jackjeff 2y agoThat’s not necessarily true. RIPA notices do indeed assume you’re in possession of the keys of anything encrypted and you must disclose when asked nicely. You just need an airtight provable way of showing you have a way to destroy that key when you push a button and do that before the notice arrive. I suspect that’s after they seize your stuff.
- volemo 2y agoI can be criminally charged for encrypting my data (and keeping it encrypted)? That’s mental! Guess, I better delete that big file of random numbers from my computer.
- kennysoona 2y ago> I can be criminally charged for encrypting my data (and keeping it encrypted)? That’s mental! That's the UK.
- v3xro 2y agoYes, and they have the resources to go after every (former) user of ADP. </s>
- like_any_other 2y agoBut then you will know they are spying on you - they won't be able to do it secretly.
- sieabahlpark 2y ago[dead]
- justinclift 2y ago> I will of course just remove everything from iCloud at that point. The iPhone's backup utility doesn't seem to support anything other than iCloud, so you'd probably have to individually set up some kind of automated scheduling that (no idea how) for your main apps. Not sure if you'd be able to backup system stuff though. :(
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ohgr 2y agoI don't backup my phone anyway. There's nothing I can't replace in about 30 minutes work.
- lang4d 2y agoDo you save photos and messages somewhere?
- treesknees 2y agoIt's not automated but you can certainly still use iTunes to create a local encrypted backup of the entire phone, apps, and data. Works over USB and Wirelessly on the same network. People who decide not to use iCloud can certainly still keep their data safe.
- int_19h 2y agoOn a Mac, at least, by default it backs up to a location that then gets included into Mac's own Time Machine backup, if that is set up.
- GeekyBear 2y agoOn a Mac, creating encrypted local backups of your iOS device is built into MacOS. On Windows, you create an encrypted local backup of your iOS device using iTunes. It backs up everything. OS, Apps, and data.
- Obscurity4340 2y agoI wonder how the metadata comes into play here. Metadata is fair game even with ADP. Apple retains it and could probably be compelled to pass that along
- HexPhantom 2y agoYet I don't have much faith that the UK government will back down
- aryan14 2y agoAs they should. You can’t throw an ultimatum for something that benefits nobody but the govt. and kick everyone around. Would like to see other companies who were affected by similar situations also take this to court
- aryan14 2y agoHow well it’ll do in court is debatable, could go for either side, but regardless of the outcome it’s always good to see resistance and pushback
- immibis 2y agoApple will lose, because the government didn't break any law.
- joshuaissac 2y agoI don't know what they are arguing in this case, but there is a chance that the government violated the US-UK Bilateral Data Access Agreement 2019, which governs data access requests from either country's government to technology companies based in the other country.
- Tagbert 2y agoIf the British government insists on this applying to non-british citizens in other jurisdictions, they are likely to be in conflict with privacy laws in those countries and that will trigger an international court case.
- basisword 2y agoCan't see much coming of this. At the very least the largest two parties are all for this kind of encryption backdoor and regardless of what the 'court' decides parliament can just legislate around it.
- Defletter 2y agoYup, the Courts are ultimately there to fulfil the will of Parliament: if there's a clear power granted by Parliament to do this sort of thing, and there's no compelling objection from other areas of law, then this is more just a delaying tactic.
- drcongo 2y agoI'm not sure that's entirely true, the UK government gets sued regularly and loses a fair amount.
- Defletter 2y agoSure, but that's because the government acted in ways contrary to what Parliament willed.
- krona 2y agoEssentially true however judicial review can expose legal flaws, incompatibilities, or breaches of higher legal principles (e.g. the Human Rights Act 1998) essentially compelling (not forcing) the government to amend or adjust legislation. A notable example being section 23 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.
- Defletter 2y agoThere's an interesting talk involving Baroness Hale, who'd later go on to be President of the Supreme Court, where she mentions the Belmarsh case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYR414Q8v6A&t=2605s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYR414Q8v6A&t=2605s
- 2y ago
- Frederation 2y agoIf Apple had the wherewithall, theyd give up on the UK and be done with it. Should they not prevail legally. Pipe dream, I know.
- surgical_fire 2y agoI hope for the same. Likely not for the same reason as you, but we are together in hoping.
- nickthegreek 2y agoIsnt that their soft plan? They plan on just removing the encryption for all UK users to make the point moot domestically if this gambit doesnt bare fruit. If they want to continue to push that they want it for all users globally, Apple can attempt to leave the market fully. Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row (bbc.com) - 1769 points , 1105 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43128253 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43128253
- ohgr 2y agoI never get this perspective. Firstly we do give them a crap load of revenue. Secondly it'd probably trash any of their non US business almost immediately as people start looking for contingency in case they pull out of other countries. Thirdly they didn't pull out of China. And fourthly there are a lot of Apple engineering staff here in the UK - it'd cripple them because they won't move to the US. They will comply with the law and make a lot of noise and not a lot else.
- wil421 2y agoHow can a company the size of Apple be crippled by employees in the UK?
- ohgr 2y agoLiterally a large chunk of the ARM core team are in Cambridge including most of the GPU folk and there are a ton of infra and software team in a couple of other UK locations. On top of that, a big chunk of the follow the sun on call engineering (SRE) are here that look after global infra and most of the European support operation are in Northern Ireland.
- zzo38computer 2y agoI think that the people who want to use encryption should use their own software for encryption, which is separate from the cloud service. (This alone might not do, because you also need to implement other security, but it will be one thing to do.)
- tonetegeatinst 2y agoRemember software can be banned or regulated via export control.
- 14 2y agoExactly. Just like the pirate bay.
- akimbostrawman 2y agoThat ban seems to be incredibly toothless considering a simple DNS/IP change can bypass it.
- kjsingh 2y agoat least Apple should provide a way of inserting a module to encrypt decrypt files. and say, we just store the bytes user provide us.
- dylan604 2y agoThis is the issue. If you encrypt your own, then the software will not be able to use it as it's not a file it expects. So all of the software that you want to use your encrypted files will need to have this type of module. At that point, I feel like we've opened pandora's box. If every single app had to be able to decrypt/encrypt with your personal key, we just know someone will roll their own and fuck it up for everyone else.
- hnlmorg 2y agoIt depends on where you put that module. In NT you can have modules that sit between various operations on the file system. It’s how AV works without having to hook into every single application that reads and writes from storage. There’s no technical reason why this kind of approach couldn’t be applied by Apple for encryption. But it would require relinquishing some control over their platform, so it would never happen.
- 5kg 2y ago"In 2021: No (IPT) cases were found in favour of the complainant": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#Statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#...
- bsimpson 2y agoThis sounds like something Douglas Adams would have written about.
- gred 2y agoGood. Even if they lose, they should make as much noise as possible before giving up on the UK market. Maybe it will start to turn the tide of public perception.
- HexPhantom 2y agoThe more awareness there is, the harder it becomes for governments to quietly erode encryption without pushback. If nothing else, it might make other companies think twice before rolling over.
- 2-3-7-43-1807 2y agoany qualified opinions here on tresorit? i'm using them now for about three years and the service is alright and reliable afaiac. supposedly they don't have the private key. that makes using it sometimes a little slow compared to other options. but i decided to go with them after reading numerous horror stories about dropbox et al.
- cantrecallmypwd 2y agoWas Tarsnap evaluated? Those behind it are well known and the construction is simple and explained clearly. My general rule: never make technology recommendations without throughly vetting/testing multiple candidates and digging deep into support, the company, and demoing close to intended use.
- krunck 2y agoHow do we know there are not back-doors already in Apple's cloud storage (that the 5-eyes cult has access to)? This fight may just be theater the goal of which is to legitimize the view that Apple's cloud storage is secure and free from government snooping. Trust, then verify. No ability to verify? No trust.
- matthewdgreen 2y agoThis fight is about providing encryption to the masses. If you want to use your own open source security solution, you should definitely do that (really!). But you will be one of a small number of people doing so. And a society where only a small number of "wizards" have freedom isn't a free society at all. I am very sympathetic to the idea that more components should be open source, and Apple's systems should be much more open (particularly backup.) But at the end of the day if Apple is compromised there is no open source solution that can save you. They design the silicon.
- seanw444 2y agoIs the society that relies on everyone else to make the decisions that serve their best interests free either?
- knowknow 2y agoIt’s impossible to live without depending on other people’s decisions unless you live completely isolated. It’s not “free” but most people are fine sacrificing some freedom for other gains. This has already been discussed for centuries, see Thomas Hobbes and the social contract.
- TheDong 2y ago> This fight is about providing encryption to the masses If apple cared about providing encryption to the masses, ADP would be enabled by default and you'd have to opt out of it. As-is, all your messages, photos, and so on are backed up unencrypted to apple's servers where they can read them at will. End-to-end encryption is opt-in, and I doubt most "the masses" even know a setting for that exists.
- Cypher 2y agoApple should be celebrating Stammer for his proud tradition of freespeech not taking him to court.
- muscomposter 2y agosmells like PR/marketing
- sebastianconcpt 2y agoIt's completely disgraceful what the U.K. is doing to freedom of expression. Very happy to see Apple like this.
- aucisson_masque 2y agoUntil people start to really feel what losing privacy mean, nothing much will happen. Right now, there is still a strong support in the UK for the gouvernement crusade against encryption and overall ending of privacy. Because "why should I care, i have nothing to hide". It takes time and tragedy for populationd to educate themselves on matter, maybe in a few years or a decade the trend will invert. Until then, there isn't much apple can do. They haven't the law with them, they haven't the population with them, they got the money but they aren't going to spend it on educating people. Taking UK gouvernement to court is just the best they can do right now, a big pr stunt, like a giant ad to say to the rest of the world 'we care about your privacy, buy iphone'.
- TacticalCoder 2y ago[dead]
- Brajeshwar 2y agoFrom a leadership personality angle, who do you think initiated this brilliant marketing/messaging campaign — sue a country because ”it infringes on human rights and Apple upholds it.“ Do you think this kinds thing comes from someone in Marketing, Legal, a C-Suite, or is this kind of thing a thing by community at Apple? If it is the last, it would be brilliant to read that protocol/process/flow.
- relistan 2y agoI don’t know, but it feels like the UK gave them the softest pitch, straight over the plate, and all they had to do was hit it. (Maybe a cricket metaphor would have been better)
- relistan 2y agoPeople seem to be misinterpreting the above post. I was referring to the UK giving Apple a great marketing opportunity for their privacy stance.
- mproud 2y agoFuck the UK government
- ipv6ipv4 2y agoI've been wondering. What would happen if Tim Cook personally 'leaked' the notice on twitter? How would the UK government reasonably sanction Apple?
- genewitch 2y agoForce cell carriers to block imei of apple handsets
- volemo 2y agoThat surely wouldn’t sit well with the public?
- ForTheKidz 2y agoI'm fairly certain this would impact a large part of the government itself.
- harry8 2y agoWhy would the UK government limit itself to being reasonable? I can imagine most CEOs pausing before picking a fight with the intelligence services.
- okasaki 2y agoImagine a Chinese company sued a Westoid nation over some national security feature. HN would be calling for world war.
- HexPhantom 2y agoThe "only used in exceptional cases" argument is the same tired line every government uses before mass surveillance becomes the norm. Once a backdoor exists, it's not just "good guys" using it; it's an open invitation for abuse.
- cedilla 2y agoIt also always lead to the same downward spiral of prosecutors complaining that the data they need to investigate drug trade is right there, but they can only access it for terrorism reasons, so why not add drug trade to the list of exceptions. Repeat with homicide, then fraud, all the way down to traffic infractions.
- Cu3PO42 2y agoIndeed. During the pandemic, restaurants in Germany were required to track customer's information including addresses, so people could be informed in case of a confirmed CoViD infection of another customer who was there at the same time. Of course, this information was never to be used for any other purpose whatsoever. In one case, however, there was a capital crime near a restaurant (or similar venue) and police and prosecutor used this information illegally to track down witnesses. They were sued after the fact and lost, but got nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Once information is available, it will be used for purposes other than the intended one, even by the "good guys".
- HPsquared 2y agoBetter to simply not collect the data in the first place. It's like the hierarchy of controls used in risk management, from most to least effective: - Elimination – physically remove the hazard - Substitution – replace the hazard - Engineering controls – isolate people from the hazard - Administrative controls – change the way people work - PPE – protect the worker with equipment Only with hazardous data, or things like moral hazards rather than physical hazards.
- moring 2y agoOfftopic, but do you know some good sources to read on that matter?
- lucasRW 2y agoHow do you guys interpret the fact that the UK hasn't requested such backdoors for Android-based stuff ? Ie. is this an indication that they already have such thing ? The UK "laws" are extremely evil when it comes to violating basic rights, they can essentially force companies to shut up, "gagging orders", etc...
- miav 2y agoThis is about end-to-end encryption. Google doesn’t do that.
- hu3 2y agoWhere did you hear that? A quick search tells me google does end-to-end encryption since at least 2021 [1]. https://www.androidcentral.com/how-googles-backup-encryption-works-good-bad-and-ugly https://www.androidcentral.com/how-googles-backup-encryption...
- neycoda 2y agoGovernment backdoors to devices not only allow governments to manipulate their people in domineering ways, but make it easier for hackers to steal form users. This will always be true.
- whywhywhywhy 2y agoHonestly think they should just disable all iPhone functionality but phone calls and the politicians will fold within hours. End of the day people love their devices more than their rulers and it’s a tangible way to action citizens who would normally sleep though this into having their privacy protected.