Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#141

Post by wkat4242 »

maeil wrote: post #107
botanical76 wrote: post #91

This is so disheartening. I thought we were making progress in the anti-surveillance privacy narrative, but this says otherwise. As a UK citizen, is there anything I can do to dissuade this? edit: typo

> As a UK citizen, is there anything I can do to dissuade this? If you voted for this Tory-lite government, then you can stop voting for any future Tory-lite governments. If you did not, there's not much you can do in practice without devoting your life to it.

But the Tories are not in power. Can't labour just repeal it?

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#142

Post by ben_w »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #93
ben_w wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that conversation will look something like this: "If you want to sell phones in our country, you have to give us access to anyone we say is a criminal using your phones in any country". "You are asking us to break the law in those other countries." "Do you want to sell phones in our country, or not? We know you'll blink first." (Will Apple blink? I don't know. But I am confident that the UK government is filled w…

It depends on whether other countries make or enforce conflicting laws. The UK order says they can't tell people after implementing the backdoor that Advanced Data Protection no longer provides the claimed level of security, which is a form of dishonesty that probably violates consumer protection laws in many countries. And Apple argued to the UK Parliament when the relevant law was being enacted that it violates the…

> The UK doesn't have the geopolitical clout it once did, especially not after Brexit.

Aye.

But (1) I don't think the UK government really understands that, and (2) for intelligence operations, they might still have enough.

Everyone else has the exact same dichotomy of simultaneously wanting all the computers safe from other hackers while also hacking everything themselves, and many also want the added extra of guaranteed citizen's right to privacy, so legal fights like this are advantageous to most nations: all the other countries watching this get to have their cake (they can spy on encrypted comms) while eating it too (in this metaphor, when Apple is found out, they get to punish Apple and pretend to be above such things).

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#143

Post by idle_zealot »

mathw wrote: post #124
elashri wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have lived to the day that we give an example on china not doing something stupid a western democracy does about rights and freedom. Wild times to be alive. I am also surprised that they demand worldwide access and not just UK users data or all the data stored in UK jurisdiction. But this is going too far.

And if you think China and the USA and Russia wouldn't want it... hey I've got this bridge for sale.

The difference is that China and Russia have the sense to spy on foreign citizens with hackers, trackers, and other covert means. Somehow the UK feels entitled to Apple doing their espionage for them, and has the gall to ask publicly.

Note that this is not China apologia: they do the same brazen shit locally, but they're an authoritarian regime. I have lower expectations for human rights there.

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#144

Post by idle_zealot »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #139
layer8 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be enforced by fining the UK legal entities (or worse, like charging their legal representatives) if they don't comply. If the UK is serious about this, the only alternative for Apple would eventually be to completely cease operations in the UK. By the way, this is similar to why for true GDPR compliance, data centers should be operated by EU companies that aren't subsidiaries of US companies, because even i…

The most horrible part of the discussion we're making is that we're arguing that UK intelligence should be able to access only UK related data, and not that UK intelligence should not undermine privacy of people

The Overton Window has shifted.

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#145

Post by jonhohle »

JW_00000 wrote: post #103
latexr wrote: post #89

> When asked by The Post whether any government had requested a backdoor, Google spokesman Ed Fernandez did not provide a direct answer but suggested none exist: "Google cannot access Android end-to-end encrypted backup data, even with a legal order," he stated. No, that does not suggest none exists, it only says they don’t have access to it. They could have chosen or have been ordered to give the keys to the governm…

But if they could give a key to the government agency, it wouldn't be end-to-end encrypted, right? Or are you thinking they would have a copy of users' keys that they gave out? (Which I guess is technically possible.)

It would be no different from how multiple devices and users access the same content (chat, shared data, etc.). The government’s keys would always be included in set which encrypts the real key. They don’t need the users’ key, Apple doesn’t need their private keys. So technically still end to end encrypted, just with a hidden party involved. Users have no way of knowing this doesn’t already happen.

And when their key leaks, it’s as good as no encryption, but still end-to-end encrypted.

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#147

Post by janice1999 »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #137
captainbland wrote: post #129

Given recent polling, we have to assume that what is MI5's today will be Reform's tomorrow. We have to ask what our government and judiciary are doing putting our privacy in the hands of the far-right.

I never understood this kinds of arguments... both sides want to read your private data, but it's bad if 'the other side' does it? It's your current MI5/government that wants access to apples data.

One side wants to purge large parts of the population and the other one doesn't. Yes, all parties can abuse data, but their policies do actually matter.

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#148

Post by snapcaster »

csmattryder wrote: post #121
snapcaster wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree with your analysis but i wouldn't be so fatalistic. This stuff _isn't_ inevitable and i think it's possible to win people over to our side. Things can change for the better, but they won't unless people who care don't give up

Ahh, I used to have that opinion, but I've encountered too many "It's fine if they want it, I've got nothing to hide" people. (They never give you their Facebook password if you ask, though. Funny, that.) Change what you can, I say, VPN on the network device.

Yeah totally see your point, i'm just not ready to give up yet

Re: U.K. orders Apple to let it spy on users’ encrypted accounts

#150

Post by jonhohle »

arccy wrote: post #125
latexr wrote: post #89

> When asked by The Post whether any government had requested a backdoor, Google spokesman Ed Fernandez did not provide a direct answer but suggested none exist: "Google cannot access Android end-to-end encrypted backup data, even with a legal order," he stated. No, that does not suggest none exists, it only says they don’t have access to it. They could have chosen or have been ordered to give the keys to the governm…

if google were to transfer the keys elsewhere, they would have (temporary) custody of the keys, granting them access, and invalidating the statement.

My layman’s understanding is that a user’s private key is used to decrypt a random key, which is then used to protect data. Shared files then only require adding key access to that small secret by someone who knows the original key. If one of the original public keys is always one held by authorities, Google never needs to have custody of the private key and can’t access the data themselves making the statement true, but misleading.
Post reply on HN