Comment by piyuv
1 day ago
This can set a dangerous precedent. Now why wouldn’t any country demand the same, basically eliminating Advanced Data Protection everywhere, making user data easily accessible to Apple (and therefore governments)?
1 day ago
This can set a dangerous precedent. Now why wouldn’t any country demand the same, basically eliminating Advanced Data Protection everywhere, making user data easily accessible to Apple (and therefore governments)?
The choice was either eliminate it now (globally, via introduction of a backdoor) or eliminate it in the UK (but keep it globally).
So, perhaps this is a bit of a dangerous precedent, but it was the least-bad option.
That’s a false dichotomy.
Another choice, however unpalatable to all parties, would have been for Apple to stop doing business in the UK.
Why do pro-privacy tech folks on here act like Apple is some charity? Apple is a business. It won't fight a citizen's fight on your behalf. It is on citizens to use their democratic power to ensure their representatives act as the voting base wants. Apple's goal is to make money. The government is a representation of your will.
6 replies →
I’m full in on Apple and hoped they nuked iCloud in the UK for this rather than compromise the product.
This is still better than a back door but it sets an awful precedent.
See my other reply.
They could also sell the entire business to Google. Why bother with listing options even worse for everyone involved?
2 replies →
> would have been for Apple to stop doing business in the UK
Apple employes thousands of people in the UK. I really don't see any practical way they could have done that.
1 reply →
When UK demanded a backdoor to e2ee in iMessage, Apple told them they’d rather get out of UK. Why not do the same here? You’re posing a false dichotomy.
> Apple told them they’d rather get out of UK
To my knowledge, Apple has always said that their response would be to withdraw affected services rather than break encryption.
> Apple has said planned changes to British surveillance laws could affect iPhone users’ privacy by forcing it to withdraw security features, which could ultimately lead to the closure of services such as FaceTime and iMessage in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/20/uk-survei...
2 replies →
What would that change, effectively, other than have Apple lose money?
The UK would still lose ADP (and then also just Apple products in general). A precedent would still be set.
Your posing a strictly worse third option. Sure, it's an option, I guess. Apple could also just close down globally, as a fourth option. Or sell off to Google as a fifth. But I was trying to present the least-bad option (turn off ADP), rather than an exhaustive list.
2 replies →
It isn't really a precedent. Companies, even high-rolling American tech companies, have to abide by the laws and regulations of the countries that they operate in. I guess there is a question of whether this is a legal demand that they truly had to follow, or just a request, and whether they could fight it in court, but Apple seems to be hoping to adjudicate it in the court of public opinion (apparently the initial backdoor request was secret and it got leaked).
> abide by the laws and regulations of the countries that they operate in.
In this case, the UK is seeking to use local law to change what is allowable on an international basis.
That's a bit different than a nation controlling the law on their own soil.
That was Apple's interpretation : That to comply with what the UK requested they would have to have the same thing everywhere.
But of course that is nonsense, and Apple could theoretically have a nation-specific backdoor (e.g. for accounts in a given country a separate sequestered decryption key is created and kept in escrow for court order).
I mean, Apple "complied" by disabling ADP just in the UK. They undermined their own "worldwide" claim, as ADP still works everywhere else, and the UK has no access.
7 replies →
Wait, are you saying the U.S. might demand the same? In the current political environment?
UK is much smaller than US and they didn’t even fight this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
what do you mean? other countries have demanded the same, e.g. China.
China only requires it for their citizens. The UK asked access to any person's data in the world.