8 ms·

Including Apple. If it's that easy, how long do we really expect Advanced Data Protection to be free from government backdooring?

by amelius 9mo ago

dixie_land 9mo ago
Was it ever?
- Tagbert 9mo ago
  The British Government believes it to be secure. That’s why they were asking for a back door.
  - eesmith 9mo ago
    Another way to interpret it is they think it's secure against the British Government, and were asking for the same back door the US has.
  - OutOfHere 9mo ago
    It's just that the British Government doesn't have access to the backdoor whereas the American Government does have it. It's in no way secure.
  - amelius 9mo ago
    Brits: can we have access to the backdoor? Apple: sure, but only if you pretend you didn't get access Brits: jolly good
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - lambdasquirrel 9mo ago
    That only means that the UK government doesn’t have access to the backdoor.
    - breppp 9mo ago
      according to the snowden documents it is quite obvious that if the US government had a backdoor then the UK government would have one through five eyes
    - GorbachevyChase 9mo ago
      It’s possible that the back door already exists, and they already have it. So if they had conducted unlawful surveillance using these methods, then they may have to come up with some plausible explanation as to how they got that information legally. You could imagine a scenario where there is no plausible explanation for how the information could have been legally obtained. If they codify the use of the back door into law, then there is no need for all this theater. One of my favorite conspiracy theories is that this is what the CIA Stargate program was. You don’t leak the existence of informants or satellites because you just got the information from “a psychic“.
    - dixie_land 9mo ago
      Exactly they built one for the Chinese government. It's not if they have a back door it's who gets to use it
  - graemep 9mo ago
    While they did did get a backdoor they did get Apple to withdraw the product from the UK so it no longer impedes mass suveillance.
gruez 9mo ago
>If it's that easy, how long do we really expect Advanced Data Protection to be free from government backdooring? Taking down an app is hardly unprecedented. Forcing companies to add backdoors in secret is, so it's a stretch to think that ADP is compromised.
- bigyabai 9mo ago
  > Forcing companies to add backdoors in secret is We have precedent: 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-... Apple has since confirmed in a statement provided to Ars that the US federal government “prohibited” the company “from sharing any information,”
  - gruez 9mo ago
    "secretly sharing notification data" (ie. asking for records kept in the usual course of business[1]) is not the same as "forcing companies to add backdoors in secret" [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1732 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1732
    - bigyabai 9mo ago
      Thinking something is "unprecedented" is not an argument against it happening. Apple has surprised us before, I see no reason to expect ADP is any different.
      - gruez 9mo ago
        >Apple has surprised us before It really isn't. The reason I used the specific wording for "records kept in the usual course of business" is that's the legal standard for subpoenable information. It shouldn't be surprising to any legal expert that it was fair game for the government to request. The only thing surprising is that we didn't know it specifically happened before, so it's only as "surprising" as chatgpt logs being subpoenaed. Yes, it's "surprising" for the people using chatgpt as their therapist and think it should have been protected, but ask any lawyer and they'll all agree it's fair game. On the other hand forcing apple to specifically insert a backdoor runs into all sorts of constitution/due process issues.
culi 9mo ago
They recently started requiring you to set a safety person instead of just giving you a code to write down... Smells

Including Apple. If it's that easy, how long do we really expect Advanced Data Protection to be free from government backdooring?

by amelius 9mo ago

Including Apple. If it's that easy, how long do we really expect Advanced Data Protection to be free from government backdooring?

dixie_land 9mo ago

Was it ever?

Tagbert 9mo ago
The British Government believes it to be secure. That’s why they were asking for a back door.
- eesmith 9mo ago
  Another way to interpret it is they think it's secure against the British Government, and were asking for the same back door the US has.
- OutOfHere 9mo ago
  It's just that the British Government doesn't have access to the backdoor whereas the American Government does have it. It's in no way secure.
- amelius 9mo ago
  Brits: can we have access to the backdoor? Apple: sure, but only if you pretend you didn't get access Brits: jolly good
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- lambdasquirrel 9mo ago
  That only means that the UK government doesn’t have access to the backdoor.
  - breppp 9mo ago
    according to the snowden documents it is quite obvious that if the US government had a backdoor then the UK government would have one through five eyes
  - GorbachevyChase 9mo ago
    It’s possible that the back door already exists, and they already have it. So if they had conducted unlawful surveillance using these methods, then they may have to come up with some plausible explanation as to how they got that information legally. You could imagine a scenario where there is no plausible explanation for how the information could have been legally obtained. If they codify the use of the back door into law, then there is no need for all this theater. One of my favorite conspiracy theories is that this is what the CIA Stargate program was. You don’t leak the existence of informants or satellites because you just got the information from “a psychic“.
  - dixie_land 9mo ago
    Exactly they built one for the Chinese government. It's not if they have a back door it's who gets to use it
- graemep 9mo ago
  While they did did get a backdoor they did get Apple to withdraw the product from the UK so it no longer impedes mass suveillance.

gruez 9mo ago

>If it's that easy, how long do we really expect Advanced Data Protection to be free from government backdooring? Taking down an app is hardly unprecedented. Forcing companies to add backdoors in secret is, so it's a stretch to think that ADP is compromised.

bigyabai 9mo ago
> Forcing companies to add backdoors in secret is We have precedent: 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-... Apple has since confirmed in a statement provided to Ars that the US federal government “prohibited” the company “from sharing any information,”
- gruez 9mo ago
  "secretly sharing notification data" (ie. asking for records kept in the usual course of business[1]) is not the same as "forcing companies to add backdoors in secret" [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1732 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1732
  - bigyabai 9mo ago
    Thinking something is "unprecedented" is not an argument against it happening. Apple has surprised us before, I see no reason to expect ADP is any different.
    - gruez 9mo ago
      >Apple has surprised us before It really isn't. The reason I used the specific wording for "records kept in the usual course of business" is that's the legal standard for subpoenable information. It shouldn't be surprising to any legal expert that it was fair game for the government to request. The only thing surprising is that we didn't know it specifically happened before, so it's only as "surprising" as chatgpt logs being subpoenaed. Yes, it's "surprising" for the people using chatgpt as their therapist and think it should have been protected, but ask any lawyer and they'll all agree it's fair game. On the other hand forcing apple to specifically insert a backdoor runs into all sorts of constitution/due process issues.

culi 9mo ago

They recently started requiring you to set a safety person instead of just giving you a code to write down... Smells