No that doesn't bother me either. I have never assumed governments are working for the people, I have never assumed the internet is safe and secure. All that's happened is that one case has been highlighted by one company. That's good. Do I feel less safe now? Absolutely not and I suggest those complaining are rather naïve if they think they are.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Pulls Encrypted iCloud Security Feature in UK Amid Government Backdoor Demands
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Indeed. Americans can be very hateful online and will post comments which are very negative about a person in a way most Brits absolutely wouldn't. As a Brit maybe that's why I'm less bothered by this news - I have my own moral compass, I'm not sure Americans so.
Because we are very different from you guys. We elect a government and they govern according to their mandate. Are you so naïve that you believed prior to this news the internet was safe and secure?
Apple did not comply, and that’s why they pulled the service instead.
The UK government had asked for access to data of ALL users from all nations (in certain specific cases, when a judge had requested it).
I've always assumed that was the case anyway. If you are suspected of doing something nefarious the police can confiscate your computing equipment and investigate your data.
As someone who lives in the UK I was trying to decide how bothered I was about this, then checked and realised I had not turned on ADP anyway. I suspect the vast majority of people who it may impact are probably in the same situation. A case of headline > Reality.
With the ADP option enabled not even Apple can access your encrypted data.
Without ADP enabled Apple (only) can access your encrypted data.
The UK request was for Apple to be able to access all encrypted data on govt request.
Apple’s response is to remove ADP option for UK customers.
People who don't have ADP turned on will see no difference. This is most people. Their data is still encrypted.
There is a lot of misinformation on the subject as the 9to5 article says:
“There’s a huge piece of nuance getting missed in a lot of the coverage of today’s announcement. Apple is not “removing end-to-end encryption” from the UK as some headlines have suggested. The company is removing the Advanced Data Protection feature, yes, but that feature exists separately from Apple’s broader end-to-end encryption efforts.”
I’ve written to my MP, if you’re in the UK, then please do the same
Apple has withdrawn its Advanced Data Protection iCloud feature from the United Kingdom following government demands for backdoor access to encrypted user data, according to Bloomberg. The move comes after UK officials secretly ordered Apple to provide unrestricted access to encrypted iCloud content worldwide.
Customers who are already using Advanced Data Protection, or ADP, will need to manually disable it during an unspecified grace period to keep their iCloud accounts, according to the report. Apple said it will issue additional guidance in the future to affected users and that it "does not have the ability to automatically disable it on their behalf."
The UK government's demand came through a "technical capability notice" under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), requiring Apple to create a backdoor that would allow British security officials to access encrypted user data globally. The order would have compromised Apple's Advanced Data Protection feature, which provides end-to-end encryption for iCloud data including Photos, Notes, Messages backups, and device backups.
Apple's decision to pull the feature rather than comply with the UK's demands is consistent with the company's previous statements that it would consider withdrawing encrypted services from the UK rather than compromise security. Apple has long opposed creating backdoors in its products, maintaining that such access points would inevitably be discovered by malicious actors.
Notice UK iCloud users now see after the feature was pulled
The UK order was particularly controversial as it would have required Apple to provide access to data from users outside the UK without their governments' knowledge. Additionally, the IPA makes it illegal for companies to disclose the existence of such government demands.
US security agencies, including the FBI and NSA, have been advocating for increased use of encryption to protect against Chinese cyber threats, creating potential conflicts between UK and US security interests.
"Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end-to-end encryption is more urgent than ever before,” said Apple on Friday, per Bloomberg. The company added that it "remains committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data and are hopeful that we will be able to do so in the future in the United Kingdom."
Note that the loss of Advanced Data Protection in the UK does not affect the existing end-to-end encryption of several other Apple features available in the country, including iMessage, FaceTime, password management and health data.
Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Article Link: Apple Pulls Encrypted iCloud Security Feature in UK Amid Government Backdoor Demands
No. It's all stuff and nonsense. It will make zero difference to 99% of Apple users. Did you really think GCHQ were impotent when it comes to accessing your data should you be subject to their scrutiny? There is so much naïvety on here. I didn't realise how many people thought they were safe from prying eyes before this story came to light. That's the real story!
So what is it you want to say? Is it racist, homophobic, hate speech, humiliating people with disabilities?
I’m genuinely interested in what you feel you should be able to say to another person, that you wouldn’t be able to here in the UK.
In my experience of many years on the internet Americans like being really nasty to each other. I'm still shocked by the venom unleashed on a person who doesn't agree with them. My Brit sensitivities are challenged and I hear myself saying "Woah! Was that really called for?". Americans want to ensure these rights continue, including shooting the other person if it carries on. It has been suggested that Americans are concerned only about themselves and their families, the British about their community and society. It makes sense when you look at their healthcare system. Look after number 1.
It's about time we realised we in the UK hold European values - whatever our views on the EU as a political entity. We are very different from Americans even though we share a language.
Yep, though there’s the danger hard-of-thinking UK right-wingers will fall for the anti-immigration, anti-elite, dog-whistle racism again, and we’ll end up with current US style politics that will make the Brexit disaster look like a nice tea party.
While I’ve absolutely no problem with right-wingers making their own lives worse, it would be nice if it didn’t affect the rest if us as well.
You know as much as I understand they have investors, Apple had the power to force change. A simple withdrawal of service would have catalysed a revolt against this law, and it would have changed in a few months of lost cloud profit.
Equally, it’s a company that owes me nothing, but I’m incredibly disappointed and will begin looking into other solutions.
You want to turn that off, fine, but give me a way to buy service from someone who doesn’t want to be a passive participant in worldwide espionage.
And let’s not ignore that this “uk rule” is a gateway for the USA to get whatever information they want.
It’s a hideous law, and Apple is pathetic for not pushing to a testing point, when they have so much power.
I never want to hear Apple or Tim Cook talk about “privacy is a human right” again, they clearly don’t actually believe that.
Equally, it’s a company that owes me nothing, but I’m incredibly disappointed and will begin looking into other solutions.
You want to turn that off, fine, but give me a way to buy service from someone who doesn’t want to be a passive participant in worldwide espionage.
And let’s not ignore that this “uk rule” is a gateway for the USA to get whatever information they want.
It’s a hideous law, and Apple is pathetic for not pushing to a testing point, when they have so much power.
I never want to hear Apple or Tim Cook talk about “privacy is a human right” again, they clearly don’t actually believe that.
they love arresting people for wrong-think in europe, especially when it occurs on the internet. this is gonna make it easier to do for their government.
Are you sure about that, or would it have angered the vast, vast majority of its UK customers? We see lots of posters on MacRumors saying “I don’t see what the big deal is, I have nothing to hide” - what do we think “regular” users would think? While I wish you were correct about catalyzing a revolt against the law, I suspect you’re not.
I think Apple is making it incredibly clear it doesn’t want to be a participant in worldwide espionage. It’s pulling a feature, making a huge stink about why it doesn’t want to, and if reports are correct, are working with US government officials to try to get the UK to back off.
I don’t know how you can come to that conclusion. They clearly do. If they didn’t they would have silently complied, not leak the original request and then make a big fuss about pulling the feature to make sure it gets reported on.
You said you wouldn’t say anything to me, but you couldn’t post anything online criticizing or saying, my religion was false.
I seriously think you could say a lot of things to offend me even insulting things, but I wouldn’t want to see you getting in trouble for offending me. I just don’t like the concept of that even if I was the so-called victim. Even if you personally called me the worst thing that you could come up with (obviously I can’t repeat an example because of forum rules) I don’t think it deserves you going to some sort of jail or even being punished. Do I need to be protected from people saying mean or hateful things to me? I can see I need to be protected from someone physically hurting me. I tried to put myself in the head of someone that’s the victim of this and in the past have been the victim of some pretty awful words said, but I don’t think those people should be punished for saying them.
Well, I agree there would be illegal definition so that would make it clear. I think it would have to be very broad to cover different offenses. The same things that would offend me might not offend you. I think you would make a lot of speech illegal.
I don’t think the trade-off is worth the protection it gives. It’s not because someone can’t hurt my feelings because if you knew something about me personally you could really target some pretty bad insults that would bother me, especially if you said them in public. I’d consider myself more of a passive person in person and even online. I like discussing and analyzing things, but I don’t like aggression necessarily. If I feel someone’s just crazy or outwardly aggressive I usually just avoid them. Maybe I would feel better if I knew they weren’t allowed to say anything mean to me, but I don’t like the idea of having a law saying what I’m allowed to say. Also, even if there was this hypothetical law in the USA, I don’t think I would feel safer because people break the law. Then I would have to call the police and hope that they do something which many times they’re not very effective. Basically, I would be trading some feeling of protection from mean people for rules against what I can say. Also, like any law it could be changed so today that law might be I can’t say something against that guy’s religion but tomorrow it might be I can’t say something negative against the government.
Right now at least in the USA we have a first amendment that pretty much blocks any such laws. I know other countries y’all don’t have that, but for me personally I’m kind of protected by this. I know there’s exceptions for extreme cases, but mean or offensive things aren’t even close to that exception. It would require a repealing or modifying the amendment and then you’re opening a door to further laws.
Just from an analytical standpoint, I can’t support restrictions like this. I can’t see how it would be the better option over what we have now. We already have what you might consider safe spaces from these nasty insults. Even here on these forums while it’s not illegal for you to insult me it is restricted by the person that has control over the forum. This does allow a certain feeling of safety and keeps civility. We can have a conversation without just calling each other names which would be pointless and silly.
Most social media has these protections while not all of them. There is a certain social media that’s sort of a free-for-all, but you have to choose to go there so you know what you’re going get into. It’s not like there’s multiple alternatives that you could go to where you’re protected from offensive things. I feel if you go somewhere knowing there’s offensive things and then get offended it’s like going through a certain genre of websites then being upset that you saw a nudity or worse. It’s there, you know it’s there so just don’t go there if that offends you. That would be an example of how perhaps someone with strong religious convictions might be offended by content. Many feel that should be taken down. Even with that content, for example I can understand how it’s harmful and it’s been proven to be harmful to people psychologically even viewing it, but I have a hard time saying we should make laws against it.
I feel like anytime the government wants to get on your phone and check what content you have, it’s a problem. If someone’s not out physically hurting people, stealing things or doing bad things to other people I think the government should leave them alone. I don’t think they should have access to my iPhone or anyone’s iPhone. I don’t think they should have access to my my iCloud storage. I’m not against them trying to forcibly do it if they have a legal reason, but Apple shouldn’t have to leave it unlocked for them.
I’m also an advocate for freedom of speech, but more of a “responsible freedom of speech” than anything else. There is no absolute freedom of anything. The arbiter of such balance would either be moral compass and/or a fine tuned legal framework. Unrestricted freedom of speech is unrealistic.
Scrap my original reply as it seems due to the data being backed up the government has access to the lot of it including any messages.
Last edited:
Huh I didn't think of it like that. In that case then yes. Thanks to Apple the British government now has a CES to every single bit of information from your Apple
Devices they backup in any way. Think I'll stick to wattsapp.
Trouble is under international treaty's of sharing security information, the US security services have access to all the data too. So no US government will condone it fully although a handful of senates have done. If Apple created a back door as originally requested, then anyone with a security data sharing treaty with the UK gets access too. And they would ALL love that!