20 ms·
UK backing down on Apple encryption backdoor after pressure from US
- miohtama 1y agoWhat could go wrong? The UK is the same country that arrests 12,000 people a year for posting online. > Now every force in the country has a team sifting through people’s posts trying to determine what crosses an undefined threshold. “It is a complete nightmare,” one officer admits Britain’s police are restricting speech in worrying ways https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police-are-restricting-speech-in-worrying-ways https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police... From The Economist
- HPsquared 1y ago12k a year?!? That is a staggering number. I wonder what the stats were in East Germany (though they may have had harsher punishments.. that can be ratcheted up later though once the system is in place)
- cryptoegorophy 1y agoPer gpt: Estimates vary, but roughly 250,000–300,000 people were imprisoned for political reasons over the GDR’s 41-year existence—an average of ~6,000–7,000 annually. Just wow. I wonder if we will study this in history textbooks about downfall of UK
- AnnikaL 1y agoThe population of East Germany in 1990 was 16 million, while the population of the UK today is over 4 times larger at 68 million. (I still don't think the UK should jail people for being hateful online, though.)
- jansper39 1y agoAs a resident of the UK I can safely say, no we will not, as we are categorically not arresting 12K people a year for simply posting things online. I would be more likely to include some sections about the current US administration though.
- miohtama 1y agoTo ask His Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the number of people arrested daily for non-threatening, online communication offences, and what assessment they have made of the implications of such arrests for freedom of speech. https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2025-07-17/debates/F807CB70-D90D-4A19-9433-99539B7CF21F/OnlineCommunicationOffenceArrests https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2025-07-17/debates/F807C...
- immibis 1y agoIt depends what you count as political reasons. Plausible bullshit could be generated to support the idea that arrest for any particular crime is political, or just as easily, to oppose that idea. I draw the bar for "political arrest" at somewhere like "arrested for opposing the incumbent in an election". I don't think "arrested for saying it's time to gas the muslims" - which is the sort of thing happening in the UK and getting counted in these numbers - should be called "political arrest". That's just called committing a crime. That would only become a "political arrest" if gassing the muslims was a politically acceptable viewpoint, equal in value to not gassing them.
- rpledge 1y agoEast Germany fell in 1990 - I doubt there were even 12,000 people online in East Germany at that point in time.
- mtmail 1y agoNobody was online. TLD .dd was registered but no domains registered. Two universities had a small intranet.
- slater 1y ago> 12k a year?!? That is a staggering number. (i think OP might be speedrunning a "what opinions, mfer?" goose meme thing. i bet the reason is "for posting right-wing nationalistic garbage likely to incite hatred", or similar)
- Fluorescence 1y agoIt's mostly far-right shit-stirring because it's a much broader set of crimes than you are being led to believe. It's basically every possible crime "by communication": "A spokeswoman for Leicestershire police said crimes under Section 127 and Section 1 include “any form of communication” such as phone calls, letters, emails and hoax calls to emergency services." I expect it's mostly domestic abuse cases because what was once screamed through a closed door is now messaged online. When a family member starts threatening others, an arrest is probably the necessary intervention to prevent actual violence. It's a similar story in cases like e.g. community racial tensions and gang violence. Once the threats are happening online, real violence is imminent and action warranted.
- tolien 1y ago[citation needed], your Economist article [0] quotes 30 a day (which would be <11k a year) but muddies the water pretty significantly: > Under these laws, British police arrest more than 30 people a day for online posts, double the rate in 2017. Some are serious offenders, such as stalkers. How many of those 30 were for "online posts" (and of which nature - Lucy Connolly is a favourite example cited by the likes of Vance, but she was arrested for trying to stir up racial tension when there were already race riots going on)? Who can tell, because the article didn't seem to bother asking. 0: For anyone curious, https://archive.ph/vaCkJ#selection-1287.0-1298.0 https://archive.ph/vaCkJ#selection-1287.0-1298.0
- aunty_helen 1y agoRidiculous thing to say when any number north of 0 is too many. But go ahead, muddy an otherwise extraordinarily simple argument.
- tolien 1y agoMuddying the "simple argument" would be lumping stalkers in with people inciting violence against foreigners and posting nasty comments about the Prime Minister, to make some kind of point about the police. That would be ridiculous.
- aunty_helen 1y agoStalking: Already a Crime Inciting Violence: Already a Crime Posting nasty comments: Not a crime. Glad I could clear things up for you.
- belter 1y ago> The UK is the same country that arrests 12,000 people a year for posting online. I though it could not be true, but actually it is...WTF? https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-002239_EN.html https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-0022...
- geek_at 1y agoIn Europe we don't value free speech as high as the US. There is "forbidden speech" (around lying about Holocaust related topics and insulting people online) and I think it's a good thing in total. You spew out the worst of the worst on the internet you should be able to be held accountable
- giantg2 1y agoUS has plenty of arrests for terroristic threats and similar. Many of these are online now. 12k arrests per year related to online posts doesn't sound all that high.
- FirmwareBurner 1y agoMaking terrorist threats are different than insulting some's religion, complaining about illegal immigrant crimes or shitting on politicians online. It's disingenuous to argue they're in the same ballpark that EU and US speech is similarly policed because it's not.
- giantg2 1y agoNot terrorist threats - terroristic threats. This includes anything that someone might think is threatening. Do you have examples of non-threatening language resulting in arrest in the UK?
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago>Not terrorist threats - terroristic threats. This includes anything that someone might think is threatening WAHAT?! Are we making up new terms for "someone offended me online and since I feel threatened I call it terroristic"? Actual threats are already legally defined and punished. So is terrorism. So it's either terrorism or it's not, and it's either a threat or it's not.
- cmsj 1y agoOn the one hand, freedom of speech is great. On the other hand, you have whatever the fuck is going on in America these days, and that is not great. So... I dunno, neither option is good.
- NooneAtAll3 1y agothere was twitter cancelling before, and people that aren't fine with America now were fine back then that's normal
- Xss3 1y agoIs it surprising that 12,000 out of 60,000,000 post illegal things like calls for violence (burn migrants to death, etc) per year? Reminder that incitement is a crime in the USA too and there's nothing in the constitution that says it's okay just because it's on twitter not irl. So far every story ive seen about arrest has been pretty cut and dry, they were blatantly hitler level racist, homophobic, or calling for others to attack people for their protected characteristics (eg race or sex).
- giantg2 1y agoI would bet the US arrests a similar number for online posts. A common one that comes up over here is a kid posting a picture at a shooting range, without any threat, and the police questioning/arresting the kid and/or parents. Same thing for kids talking about a video game and stuff. Edit: why disagree?
- RetpolineDrama 1y agoWe need to apply sanctions, and end all intelligence sharing with the UK until they stop this nonsense.
- bigfudge 1y agoI think Trump has guaranteed that European countries have ended all real intelligence sharing pretty much unilaterally.
- jansper39 1y agoHow do you expect to spy on US citizens if you don't get the five eyes to help out?
- andybak 1y agoOr we need to do a tiny bit more research before jumping to conclusions. UK law in this regard is far from perfect but this thread is mainly uninformed knee-jerking.
- magwa101 1y ago[dead]
- caycep 1y agoI don't get why the UK always does this. it's like GSM encryption all over again. Is it a particularly snoop-ey culture stemming from GCHQ or something?
- amelius 1y agoWhy should US have a monopoly on intelligence?
- johnisgood 1y agoIdeally no one should do this.
- skeezyboy 1y agobecause what are you gonna do about it?
- ThrowawayTestr 1y agoThe UK has always been a nanny state. Moore was writing about this decades ago.
- aydyn 1y agoGiven how common Moore is as family name it might be helpful to specify which Moore.
- ThrowawayTestr 1y agoIs there more than one Moore that has written authoritarian fiction set in the UK?
- aydyn 1y agoConsider that "moore UK authoritarianism" turned up zero relevant search results. You shouldn't over-estimate the popularity of your favorite comic book authors.
- yieldcrv 1y agoha should have stayed in the EU if you wanted that kind of negotiating leverage with the US now sod off, as they might say
- luxuryballs 1y agoAfter Citizenfour and Lavabit I always assume the “backing down” publicity means they have secured the access.
- nl 1y agoJust wait until Vance hears about Australia's mandatory age checks to use search engines coming in in December....
- greatgib 1y agoThe attack on privacy does kind of make sense when your remember that it is a freaking monarchy with all the inhabitants being subjects. Probably well deserved to them if it was not contagious in Europe at the moment. That being said, the crazy thing about this law and the other ones similar is this: Under the terms of the legislation, recipients of such a notice are unable to discuss the matter publicly, even with customers affected by the order, unless granted permission by the Home Secretary They always justify everything saying that real world "procedures" should apply to the digital world. But, in most occidental countries, no one is allowed to search your home without you to be aware of it and present if you are capable to do so. Still, strangely, for digital data, the norm is that your data can be raped in your back, without you being aware about it or even in the capacity to challenge that. I really find that stunning that it is so widely accepted. The former german Stasi would probably have been proud of all the parlementaries in US, UK and Europe that allowed such things.
- f33d5173 1y ago> The attack on privacy does kind of make sense when your remember that it is a freaking monarchy with all the inhabitants being subjects. That has absolutely nothing to do with it. This was an act of parliament spearheaded by the house of commons which is entirely democratically elected. The UK has no one but themselves to blame for this.
- realjohng 1y agoLong way to go but let’s celebrate the win for privacy
- lofaszvanitt 1y agoTranslation: there is already a backkdoor, here, look. Ah, ok, we are backing down.
- te_chris 1y agoToo many people here going on about UK politicians which, while problematic, seem mostly powerless in the face of a completely toxic department in the Home Office. This sort of shit is pure Home Office authoritarian bullshit and the culture there is such that it perpetuates. They seem to be particularly skilled in getting MPs to side with their world view, but it is the Home Office leading this, not the MPs. See the proscription of Palestine Action for a textbook example of Home Office bullshit.
- raelmiu 1y agoThis is amazing news
- akimbostrawman 1y agoFinally people can breathe easy again and pretend a proprietary walled garden which was already part of prism over a decade ago is actually private and secure. If the UK wants to snoop they better grovel before US feds like everybody else to get access.
- Gud 1y agoOk, as a frequent UK traveler I would prefer that the UK government has to growel at the US feet than having immediate access to all data on my iCloud.
- nominoman 1y agogood define
- sylware 1y agoUK does not want to pay for US backdoor access?
- wkat4242 1y agoPaid backdoor access is kinda risky though, make sure to do it safely!
- esafak 1y agotl,dr: "Vance argued that free speech and democracy were threatened by European elites." edit: Don't shoot the messenger.
- gruez 1y agoBroken clock is right twice a day.
- Arubis 1y agoThis tracks. Vance is probably a potential supporter of strong crypto insofar as it’s demanded of him by the VC class.
- tacker2000 1y agoTo be clear in this case, this is not Europe or the EU, its solely the UK government wanting a backdoor for themselves.
- ImJamal 1y agoLast I checked the UK was in Europe and what you are replying to only mentions Europe, not the EU. Regardless, the EU is also pushing for the same stuff.
- wkat4242 1y agoOf course because the UK isn't even in the EU anymore. They're no longer any part of EU policy.
- ascorbic 1y agoStill European though.
- wkat4242 1y agoGeographically, yes. But they've made it clear they don't want anything to do with us. Also, the 3-year period after brexit with all the whining about their 'deal' (knowing that what they wanted was legally impossible) was so annoying I'm kinda done with them. Too much drama for too long. So I've stopped buying UK products and services (eg raspberry pi) and don't consider traveling there anymore. Just like I'm doing now with the US although the latter is more difficult to do.
- duxup 1y agoI really sort of expected that by the time I reached my age that we'd have more policy makers that understood tech a little better. I feel like in the last say 25 or more years ... the needle hasn't moved.
- ryanmcbride 1y agoYeah unfortunately we live in a gerontocracy so it's the same people in charge today that were 25 years ago :(
- pjc50 1y agoUK not quite as bad as the US age wise, but the real issue is the media who demand all sorts of illiberal things. Rupert Murdoch is 94.
- omeid2 1y agoYour subtle idea that the comprehension and understanding is the shortcoming of political apparatus is overlooks the million issues as basic healthcare not being addressed. The problem is not understanding, I can assure you of that.
- Hypergraphe 1y agoI don't think it is a matter of really understanding the tech. It has to do more about how you envision the society regarding privacy and individual rights. It is indeed a political point of view on how much you want to control everything.
- MortyWaves 1y agoThank goodness for that - a UK citizen.
- johnisgood 1y agoIt is for your own safety! You will be safer now.
- jonplackett 1y agoI assumed they’d only have asked for it if they’d already OKed it with the US, and that it was probably part of a plan to give US access too via 5-eyes sharing. Turns out it was not 4D chess after all…
- gtirloni 1y ago> Turns out it was not 4D chess after all… It never is. I'm guilty of thinking there's a secret master plan sometimes and there never is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
- EasyMark 1y agoFor me it's not so much a conspiracy as the natural flow as a society becomes more fascist (as most Western government are leaning) and more "police state". It's inevitable, they want to be able to spy on every aspect of our lives and keep it recorded indefinitely as technology and public sentiment will allow. Cops want to make their jobs as easy as possible, politicians want to be able to get as much dirt on everyone as they can.
- dmix 1y agoThat’s just run of the mill authoritarianism, calling it fascism glosses over how it has proponents in every political persuasion. Authoritarianism has become very popular online these days for some reason. Giving in to fear and wanting total control are always going to be traits that pop up again and then humans have to relearn from history about why freedoms are important.
- deepsun 1y agoYes, although fascism is probably a proper word to use here -- it comes from Roman "fasces", symbolizes power to punish king's subjects (i.e. it's not about other states and kings, but about internal affairs).
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- snickerbockers 1y ago> The UK official added, this “limits what we’re able to do in the future, particularly in relation to AI regulation.” The Labour government has delayed plans for AI legislation until after May next year. What did they mean by this
- doublerabbit 1y agoThe UK AI bill included a proposal to create an AI authority, forcing third party to align with their approaches to AI. They've been looking to use AI for consumer surveillance; AI user monitoring essentially. "We can't have a backdoor so we can't use AI to monitor the user"
- jagged-chisel 1y agoAI and encryption are technically orthogonal. But they’ll use any guise to further their agenda.
- zdragnar 1y agoI suspect the steel man version of the argument is that AI is capable of producing images indistinguishable from child and revenge porn, so it must be regulated, and that means they need a way to reach into your zeros and ones to check. Maybe they want to know you're not asking it how to terrorize people, too. Hence, the confluence of AI and encryption.
- chatmasta 1y agoThey’re closely related for some use cases, like client-side content screening. If they can’t have a backdoor then maybe they’ll push for a local LLM to spy on the user’s activity and phone home when it sees something bad.
- mzajc 1y agoPresumably without alerting the user and with thresholds set by the police. That's just a backdoor with extra steps.
- lenerdenator 1y agoThat surprises me, honestly. Makes you wonder what the British government got in return for forgetting about the encryption loicence idea.
- jajuuka 1y agoThat's my thinking. With all the people who are a part of this story why would the UK government back off and no longer want to spy on iPhone users.
- harvey9 1y agoProbably nothing. they have neither leverage nor negotiating talent.
- aydyn 1y agoIt reminds me of when a UK news anchor questioned a Chinese diplomat on the general mistrust of the Chinese government by British politicians. The response was essentially: "Why? You are nothing". Britbongs stay losing.
- armada651 1y ago> they have neither leverage nor negotiating talent. The Brexit negotiations proved to me that the UK government will simply assume they have leverage and try to assert it even when they have none. Combined with the lack of negotiating talent during a high stakes deal created a perfect storm.
- dsign 1y agoThings got so out of control because the UK doesn't have heavily muscled tech emporiums that can spend time in bed with their politicians. US does. But it's a sad world the one where citizens are so helpless against their governments and the corporations.
- thewebguyd 1y ago> But it's a sad world the one where citizens are so helpless against their governments and the corporations. Helpless indeed - but, government still requires the consent of the governed. It's just that we are all very comfortable, with a lot to lose and easily distracted, so that consent to be governed is too easily given nowadays. If we do anything together as a society it should be making sure to preserve E2E Encryption as it's one of the most important tools to organize a resistance should we wish to revoke our consent to be governed.
- alt227 1y agoI am always surprised by just how much of the population is still swayed by the 'think of the children' arguments put forward by governements to justify certain curbing of freedoms.
- scarface_74 1y agoI’m by no means a Trump fan. But I thought it was negligent how the Biden administration didn’t fight for American tech companies internationally and how the prior administration was actively hostile to them. Then people wonder why tech embraced Trump.
- wkat4242 1y agoTrump will do a lot more harm to US tech companies than Biden. A lot of us here in Europe are moving away from US tech, and as we are building more of our own it's very unlikely we will come back. Right now there aren't too many EU alternatives yet which is why you don't really notice yet. But the damaged trust in the US as a 'partner' will outlive Trump for decades. As they say "trust arrives on foot and leaves on horseback".
- irusensei 1y ago> A lot of us here in Europe are moving away from US tech Are we? My impression is the other way around so could you clarify what are we building that is going to move away from US tech?
- whywhywhywhy 1y agoJust seems very unrealistic wishful thinking that Europe would suddenly become good at these kinds of software after spending the last few decades being bad at it.
- wkat4242 1y agoIt's a lot easier now because there's a huge demand all of a sudden for local services. Previously it was hard to compete with the US because the lack of regulation there and investors in the EU having more expectations rather than just throwing money at the wall and hoping it sticks. But with the exploitative business models like Google's consumer tracking and now with Trump and his trade wars the US is no longer viewed as a friend or a country to look up to. I think it will only increase the EU's push for more privacy and ethical business models. There's a big grassroots movement like "BuyFromEU" to cut US products and services out of our lives. I think that trade balance is only going to get worse. And really it was actually not bad at all, the problem is that Trump was only counting products not services when looking at the trade balance. I guess because his voters are primarily blue collar workers.
- neuroelectron 1y ago[dead]
- inglor_cz 1y agoThe EU has similar nefarious plans as well, under the Orwellian name "ProtectEU". https://www.techradar.com/pro/security/the-european-commission-wants-a-backdoor-for-end-to-end-encryptions-for-law-enforcement https://www.techradar.com/pro/security/the-european-commissi... I wonder how this clash is going to turn up. I would hate this development. This proposal is worthy of the Chinese Communist Party, and I am aghast just how many member states are fine with the concept of a preemptive surveillance state and breaking privacy left and right. Of course, that is what we get for giving Ursula von der Leyen a second term (why??) She already has a reputation from her career in German politics, having earned the nickname Zensursula (censoring Ursula).
- mschuster91 1y ago> Of course, that is what we get for giving Ursula von der Leyen a second term (why??) To answer your question: because the Conservatives just couldn't be arsed to put up an alternative.
- elric 1y agoAlso because the people aren't the ones doing the voting. I doubt most citizens even know who she is.
- inglor_cz 1y agoUvdL is the last remnant of Merkel's era, her only qualification for such a high job was her blind loyalty to Mutti. IIRC current Kanzler, Friedrich Merz, is not at all her friend and will complicate things for her on purpose. So we will see.
- froggertoaster 1y ago[flagged]
- cvwright 1y agoFunny how nobody in this thread has mentioned which party is running the UK right now…
- drnick1 1y agoWhat this type of news shows is that you really can't trust any government or company with your data. So don't give them any data -- only store data on your own hardware and set up your own servers if you really need a "cloud" for your data.
- jocalendar 1y ago[dead]
- isodev 1y agoThe specified policy aside, it’s kind of sad to see - the UK after Brexit just doesn’t carry the same weight. It would’ve been a different story if the UK as part of the EU were moving forward with a piece of legislation.
- GHanku 1y ago[dead]
- jjani 1y ago> Apple did not respond to a request for comment. “We have never built a back door or master key to any of our products, and we never will,” Apple said in February. This must be some "technically correct" weasel words bullcrap, as without at least equivalent access there is no chance Apple would be operating in China.
- benreesman 1y agoAKA "fuckin...england fucking chill, don't blow this. You're FVEY mate, why you go scaring everyone when you know I got this. Just relax, you really think TAO don't got this? The Equation Group? We got this, in there like swimwear."
- phendrenad2 1y agoMost likely the spokesperson just forgot about China. They're still a US country, after all, and US-centric thinking is the default.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoThis. Just have a demented spokesperson.
- floam 1y agoIn China they outsource that version of the iCloud services to a Chinese company hosted in China. The rest of the world is on Apple’s.
- kingkawn 1y agoThey may not have built it, but it doesn’t mean they didn’t implement something built for them.
- mzajc 1y ago> This must be some "technically correct" weasel words bullcrap Is that even necessary? A gag order means they can't reveal backdoors, and their entire stack is so locked down that discovering them is hard and unlikely.
- tempodox 1y ago> US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has also suggested the order would be an “egregious violation” of Americans’ privacy This is extremely ironic (“Americans’ privacy” basically does not exist), but I won't look a gift horse in the mouth.
- crtasm 1y agoORG are fundraising to have a presence at the hearing: https://action.openrightsgroup.org/make-our-voice-heard-apple%E2%80%99s-encryption-hearing https://action.openrightsgroup.org/make-our-voice-heard-appl...
- mass_and_energy 1y ago"Last month, Meta-owned WhatsApp said it would join Apple’s legal challenge, in a rare collaboration between the Silicon Valley rivals". Apple makes home computers, mobile devices, AV equipment and productivity/multimedia software. Meta makes social media platforms, and vr headsets. What exactly makes them "rivals"? WhatsApp vs iMessage? They're two big companies in the same sector, sure, but do they really compete against each other in a major way?
- Urahandystar 1y agoAd networks, Apple recently launched it own smaller one and nerfed Meta's data collection ability.
- cbeach 1y agoSay what you will about JD Vance but he has passionately confronted the European elites on their surveillance overreach and clearly it's had an impact. We may not like everything about the current American administration, but credit where due.
- basisword 1y agoIf you really believe that the propaganda is working well.
- Urahandystar 1y agoI didn't, but since he made his freedom of speech complaints, I've seen some utterly horrendous overreaches from the UK government that makes it clear as day he is correct. He may be a broken clock but he is striking right this time.
- basisword 1y ago>> I've seen some utterly horrendous overreaches from the UK government This is the propaganda I'm talking about. We had a summer of race riots and people were held accountable for inciting violence. Vance doesn't like that. Meanwhile his own government is deporting people for peaceful protest, cracking down on free speech at Universities, and banning journalists that it doesn't like.
- nobunaga 1y agolol You realise its only the UK that is the surveillance nightmare here? EU has strong privacy and data protections. Then again im probably talking to a maga republican that just regurgitates what their media tells them
- skeezyboy 1y ago> he has passionately confronted the European elites on their surveillance overreach passionately lol hes a role player. Americans are so easily tricked by bullshit its unreal
- crmd 1y agoI’m struggling to square Vance and the administration’s position here with the fact that the US IC uses GCHQ to collect on US persons since they’re not allowed to do so directly. Why wouldn’t they want it to be easier for NSA to spy on Americans?
- bobthepanda 1y agoThey probably already have a backdoor, and making one known and easy to access by UK provides an opening for other adversaries to spy on American iPhones.
- crmd 1y agoThanks, that makes sense.