3 ms·

The government certainly objected when Apple designed an implementation of encrypted cloud backups for iDevices. That didn't stop Apple from eventually rolling

The government certainly objected when Apple designed an implementation of encrypted cloud backups for iDevices. That didn't stop Apple from eventually rolling out encrypted cloud backups anyway. Apple also refused to insert a backdoor into iDevices when James Comey ordered them to do so. They took the FBI to court and forced them to back down. Google is perfectly capable of fighting too, but their business model puts them at a huge disadvantage. If you make your money spying on users to make ad sales more profitable, then you have no choice but to hand it over to any Federal, State or local agency that can convince a judge to issue a warrant.

anonym29 1y ago
Security theater for marketing purposes. End users have no way of verifying that their cloud backups are encrypted, and Apple is the same company that complied with the NSA's illegal, unconstitutional conspiracy to conduct warrantless bulk surveillance on American citizens and lie about it to congress: PRISM. Fortunately, no intelligence officials faced any consequences whatsoever for perjuring themselves to congress, or for engaging in a unconstitutional criminal conspiracy, so we can trust that the system of laws we've developed is working as intended and that this will never happen again.
- astrange 1y ago
  If you think Apple lied about this you can sue them for securities fraud, as it's illegal to lie to shareholders.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    I know Apple lied to me about it: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-... Their justification is that they were federally prohibited from admitting that the surveillance existed. So no, you couldn't sue them because the fed won't admit that the software exists until their pants are around their ankles.
    - astrange 1y ago
      There isn't such a justification. They can refuse to answer questions but they can't proactively lie. And if they were ordered to lie I'm not aware of anything that indemnifies them for securities fraud either.

anonym29 1y ago

Security theater for marketing purposes. End users have no way of verifying that their cloud backups are encrypted, and Apple is the same company that complied with the NSA's illegal, unconstitutional conspiracy to conduct warrantless bulk surveillance on American citizens and lie about it to congress: PRISM. Fortunately, no intelligence officials faced any consequences whatsoever for perjuring themselves to congress, or for engaging in a unconstitutional criminal conspiracy, so we can trust that the system of laws we've developed is working as intended and that this will never happen again.

astrange 1y ago
If you think Apple lied about this you can sue them for securities fraud, as it's illegal to lie to shareholders.
- bigyabai 1y ago
  I know Apple lied to me about it: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-... Their justification is that they were federally prohibited from admitting that the surveillance existed. So no, you couldn't sue them because the fed won't admit that the software exists until their pants are around their ankles.
  - astrange 1y ago
    There isn't such a justification. They can refuse to answer questions but they can't proactively lie. And if they were ordered to lie I'm not aware of anything that indemnifies them for securities fraud either.