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

Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#491

Post by dclowd9901 »

tholdem wrote: post #453
bArray wrote: post #106

Too right, it was far more problematic than they ever made out. > 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 iCl…

> What concerns me more is that Apple is the only company audibly making a stand. But still Apple operates in China and Google does not. This is weird to me. Google left China when the government wanted all keys to the citizens data. Apple is making a stand when it's visible and does not threaten their business too much. Apple is not really in the business of protecting your data, they are just good at marketing and…

Perhaps Apple has a greater leverage in China due to its outsized manufacturing presence. And it's likely they already dont offer ADP to Chinese citizens.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#492

Post by mihaaly »

IceHegel wrote: post #430

I'm sympathetic to the J.D. Vance angle, which is that European governments are increasingly scared of their own people. This is not doing a lot to change my mind.

Very wrong conclusions.

They are not scared of people, but of working, doing their job, especially when it is difficult (catching criminals). They expect the job to be done for them by others, on the expense of everyone, while they collecting all the praise.

On sympathetic to Vance I did not really found a presentable reaction, would not find on any other accidentally agreeable sentence leaving his mouth (very low chance btw.). Talking a lot about all kind of things sooner or later will hit something acceptable, which will not yield an unacceptable and destructive to society figure sympathetic.

You also should be aware of practices and conducts the various US security services practice (and probably all governemnts out there), if not from news or law but at least from the movies. When we come to the topic of who is afraid of their own.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#494

Post by jonhohle »

alt227 wrote: post #444
bArray wrote: post #106

Too right, it was far more problematic than they ever made out. > 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 iCl…

> Apple is the only company audibly making a stand Apples stand is false, they take with one hand and give with the other. There have been many times that Apple have been caught giving user data to governments at their request, lied about it, then later on admitted it once it had leaked from another source. This whole 'we will never make a backdoor' is a complete whitewash marketing stunt, why do they need to make a…

I think that’s the whole point of their push to E2E encrypt as much as possible. Saying they can’t unencrypted something worked for a while.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#495

Post by dclowd9901 »

runjake wrote: post #403
shaky-carrousel wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can provide a self destroy PIN with GrapheneOS.

And that certainly wouldn't raise their suspicion. Surely, they'd immediately let you go after that stunt.

But it would be up to him, wouldn't it? I think that's the main deal here: cart blanche access to your data, or giving into someone's bullshit fishing attempt because it's inconvenient.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#496

Post by rdm_blackhole »

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #409

Could this have been a reason UK pushed to separation from the EU? EU is all for privacy while UK is slowly drifting towards becoming a Stasi state.

This is blatantly false.

The EU has been pushing to pass the Chat Control law for the last 3 years which is even worse because at least in the UK the government would still need to get a warrant for the data they want whereas the EU wants to analyze your chat messages, emails and pictures in real time without cause or need to justify themselves.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#497

Post by doublerabbit »

ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #471
miohtama wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Furthermore, one UK head of state call everyone supporting encryption pedophiles https://x.com/BenWallace70/status/1892972120818299199

https://xcancel.com/BenWallace70/status/1892972120818299199

Thank you.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#498

Post by sangeeth96 »

fdb345 wrote: post #262
hugh-avherald wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting a retention time out is playing with fire. If the police get ahold of the other party's device, and present an exhibit which they say contains the true conversation, you could be worse off than if you retained the conversation. The fact that you have since deleted it could be incriminating. In some jurisdiction, yes, legally, such evidence might not be probative, but you might still convicted because of it.

message retention has literally NEVER been used as incrimination in a court of law. So you are wrong.

Umm, isn’t this related? https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/26/24141801/ftc-amazon-antit...

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#499

Post by 93po »

nottorp wrote: post #149
bArray wrote: post #106

Too right, it was far more problematic than they ever made out. > 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 iCl…

> have an Android device beside me that regularly asks me to back my device up to the cloud But is that backup encrypted? If it's not, all they need is to access your data. This is about having access to backups that are theoretically encrypted with a key Apple doesn't have? > We're talking about the largest back door I've ever heard of. Doesn't the US have access to all the data of non US citizens whose data is stor…

i think people focus on whether backups are encrypted too much. it really doesn't matter when the government has remote access equivalent to your live phone when it's in an unencrypted state, which they almost certainly do.

Re: Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row

#500

Post by everfree »

freedomben wrote: post #362

Devil's Advocate (meaning I don't agree with this, in fact I disagree with it, but I don't see this argument being made anywhere and think it would be interesting. If you're one of the people who are offended by this practice of people steel-manning "the other side" and only want to read comments that affirm your position, please don't read this comment). Question: Wouldn't it be better for Apple to build a UK-only e…

Without Advanced Data Protection, your data is still encrypted at rest, it's just that Apple safeguards the encryption key. The purpose of ADP is to remove control of this key from Apple, so that it's impossible for Apple to leak your data to any third party, even if they are compelled to.

So to me, backdoor encryption seems like it defeats the whole point of ADP, no? But if not - even if there is some tiny marginal benefit - cryptography is extremely expensive to get right. It's doubtful that it makes financial sense to Apple to develop a new encryption workflow for a single country for very slight security benefits.

And it still wouldn't be complying with the UK's demands anyways. The UK demanded access to accounts worldwide. If Apple is going to be non-compliant, then they might as well be non-compliant the easy way.

Post reply on HN