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

U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 331 posts

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#261

Post by sneak »

kdmtctl wrote: post #196
sneak wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple’s own transparency report. Look at the FISA (FAA702, aka Prism) section. Per the Snowden slides, this (FAA702 collection) is the #1 most used collection method by US spies. They can basically read approximately every camera roll and iMessage in the country with a few clicks.

So, seems that E2E is a total bullshit then?

iMessage e2ee is bullshit because iCloud Backup e2ee is opt-in, and approximately 0% of Apple’s user base has turned it on, making iCloud Backup non-e2ee in practice.

All of the iMessage access data (either the iMessages themselves or the iMessage sync key for “Messages in iCloud”) is stored in the non-e2ee iCloud Backup.

This means that the iMessage service e2ee is meaningless because the iMessages themselves are not e2ee.

Note well that turning on iCloud e2ee is insufficient, as everyone else that you iMessage with will still have it off, and all of your iMessages will still be backed up non-e2ee to Apple in their device backups.

Having iCloud e2ee available is the best of both worlds for Apple: they can say that it’s available for privacy-conscious users to opt into, while still being able to turn over basically 100% of all iMessages to the feds whenever they ask.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#262

Post by BiteCode_dev »

quesera wrote: post #235
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia clearly states: PRISM collects stored internet communications based on demands made to internet companies such as Google LLC and Apple under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to turn over any data that match court-approved search terms. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM They were actively providing the data on request.

Sorry, I should have been more explicit. Of course all US companies comply with US court orders. The controversial new revelation re: PRISM, via Snowden, was that NSA was also snarfing everything they could including unencrypted comms over frame relay/etc networks comprising, e.g., Google's internal inter-site networks. To which all mentioned companies said "we were not aware of this, we never authorized a backdoor f…

1 + 1 = 2

If they can ask whatever they want (they had secret courts that could provide any legal request), they have a massive data acquisition apparatus, they had many backdoors they actively used, and big companies complied while being silenced by a gag order, assuming they have direct backdoors provided officially today that we don't know about, and that companies with proprietary systems we can't check can't talk about, is just common sense at this point.

Why would you give them the benefit of the doubt when the 2 last decades of track record have given you all the reason not to, and that the next step is the logical conclusion?

Lions kill gazelles. But not this specific gazelle because I like this one?

But anyway, the point is moot, they don't even need to for this particular debate. They already have a lot. The UK therefor not matching them exactly is just them using a slightly parallel road for the same result.

It's a terrible thing either way for us. But I get the logic for them.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#263

Post by hnlmorg »

inejge wrote: post #212
hnlmorg wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not really the same as what’s being discussed though it’s still troubling. Thankfully common sense prevailed and those people weren’t convicted. meanwhile in other “less Orwellian” counties people are getting charged for similar actions: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/protester-int... Where’s your freedom of speech there? I’m not saying I agree with Met. But I also don’t agree it proves the UK…

> That’s not really the same as what’s being discussed though it’s still troubling. GP mentioned anti-royalist protester arrests and threats of arrest, you asked for a citation, I provided a link to a BBC article discussing those. How is it not "what's being discussed"? (At least in the context of this subthread.)

Fair point. But as I said, there was more to that story. And under relatively similar circumstances people are charged for protesting under similar laws in other countries too. Including ones that have freedom of speech written directly into their constitution.

So while I don’t agree with the UK arrests, it doesn’t prove that the UK is any more Orwellian than any other country.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#264

Post by hnlmorg »

kennysoona wrote: post #256
foldr wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing actually happened to the guy with the blank sheet of paper (or at least, if it did, that’s not reported in the article). Certainly you can find examples of the British police overpolicing protests, and that’s something that people rightly get angry about. It’s just that there’s a huge distance between that kind of thing (which happens pretty much everywhere from time to time - do US police forces have an exem…

> the kind of wild claims you can see in this discussion that the UK has become an Orwellian police state. It feels like it's always slowly getting closer to that. It certainly seems one of the least free developed or 'allied' countries.

Every country is moving in that direction. Thats just how politics is shifting at the moment.

I’m not happy about it but you can’t really single the UK out for it.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#265

Post by kennysoona »

hnlmorg wrote: post #264
kennysoona wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kind of wild claims you can see in this discussion that the UK has become an Orwellian police state. It feels like it's always slowly getting closer to that. It certainly seems one of the least free developed or 'allied' countries.

Every country is moving in that direction. Thats just how politics is shifting at the moment. I’m not happy about it but you can’t really single the UK out for it.

It feels like the UK is in many ways leading the charge, though. The only other country that would be a contender is Australia. It was the UK for example that introduced that barbarian law that conceivably allows imprisoning people that genuinely forget the passwords to their encrypted volumes, and that was I think over a decade ago.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#266

Post by kdmtctl »

sneak wrote: post #261
kdmtctl wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, seems that E2E is a total bullshit then?

iMessage e2ee is bullshit because iCloud Backup e2ee is opt-in, and approximately 0% of Apple’s user base has turned it on, making iCloud Backup non-e2ee in practice. All of the iMessage access data (either the iMessages themselves or the iMessage sync key for “Messages in iCloud”) is stored in the non-e2ee iCloud Backup. This means that the iMessage service e2ee is meaningless because the iMessages themselves are no…

Sorry. Didn't get it. So, if iMessages IS e2ee (supposedly) and someone properly makes iCloud backups e2ee (supposedly), how the Feds will break it?

I do understand the counterpart party problem, it is not someone can control. Sent once, it's free to be seen by anyone.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#267

Post by foldr »

kennysoona wrote: post #265
hnlmorg wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every country is moving in that direction. Thats just how politics is shifting at the moment. I’m not happy about it but you can’t really single the UK out for it.

It feels like the UK is in many ways leading the charge, though. The only other country that would be a contender is Australia. It was the UK for example that introduced that barbarian law that conceivably allows imprisoning people that genuinely forget the passwords to their encrypted volumes, and that was I think over a decade ago.

How many people have been imprisoned for that? If we’ve had a decade of being an Orwellian police state, it should be quite a few people, no?

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#268

Post by hnlmorg »

gruez wrote: post #246
hnlmorg wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you actually read that article. In there it even stated there was a pattern of behaviour and that his comments on Facebook had been shared with thousands and directly resulted criminal damage. Not only that, that his comments were intended to cause criminal damage and result in physical attacks against immigrants. What you’ve done is selectively quoted a small subset of portions from that article to misrepresent…

>Did you actually read that article. In there it even stated there was a pattern of behaviour and that his comments on Facebook had been shared with thousands Are you talking about this? "The initial post received six likes. However, it was sent to your 1,500 Facebook friends and, because of your lack of privacy settings, will have been forwarded to friends of your friends." "shared" is doing a lot of the heavy lifti…

His comments were all shared on Telegram too.

And let’s not forget that the Capital Hill riots were just a small few who took things out of hand - like with this guy. So it doesn’t need to be thousands to be a criminal offence.

There’s more about the wider debate here (the BBC is a lot more impartial than Sky News too) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr548zdmz3jo

And the notes of the arrest here: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/man-convicted-intending-stir...

The guy in question pled guilty too. So he clearly admits responsibility for the attack on the hotel. And that in itself should indicate that there’s more to this story than just “shitposting” on Facebook.

The problem here is folks like Elon Musk are focusing on the “freedom of speech” aspect (and if course he is, he’s got a vested self interest to) and given Elons media reach, this story gets skewed into a different debate.

The ironic thing is the biggest voices arguing that the UK is Orwellian don’t even realise that arrests have been happening in their own county for the same things and for much longer than in the UK.

For example in America, 2 years ago: https://teslatelegraph.com/2023/11/14/a-man-has-been-sentenc...

Or how about 10 years ago: https://www.mic.com/articles/54961/8-social-media-users-arre...

And that’s my biggest complaint about this discussion on HN: The UK is singled out when this is happening in every country. And the cases people refer to in the UK are being distorted to sound like it’s harmless memes when the actual comments are far from what any sane person would call “shitposting”.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#269

Post by kennysoona »

foldr wrote: post #267
kennysoona wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like the UK is in many ways leading the charge, though. The only other country that would be a contender is Australia. It was the UK for example that introduced that barbarian law that conceivably allows imprisoning people that genuinely forget the passwords to their encrypted volumes, and that was I think over a decade ago.

How many people have been imprisoned for that? If we’ve had a decade of being an Orwellian police state, it should be quite a few people, no?

The fact that you have the law itself is pretty troubling.

And some of the protestors at the coronation of Charles were pretty blatant.

And all the examples of police showing up because of a tweet, often not even hateful just not falling in line sufficiently with rightthink.

Re: U.K. demand for a back door to Apple data threatens Americans, lawmakers say

#270

Post by impossiblefork »

scarface_74 wrote: post #245
impossiblefork wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but my government wouldn't care if I organized a protest. It's even likely that if I did, the police wouldn't even show up, and in the end, I have democratic control over it. Meanwhile, I am in literal competition with basically all other people's companies.

You think you have control over what police do? In major cities not even the civilian government would dare piss off the police. Besides, the police have qualified immunity according to the Supreme Court to do all sorts of nastiness.

They literally will not come unless there's indication that somebody will show up to throw rocks at me etc.

I'm Swedish. Qualified immunity is just not a thing at all.

Post reply on HN