131–140 of 1001 posts
So instead of building a back door they're just completely removing the option to use E2E encryption altogether, thus making everything freely available to government by default? How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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.
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...
So instead of building a back door they're just completely removing the option to use E2E encryption altogether, thus making everything freely available to government by default? How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door?
So instead of building a back door they're just completely removing the option to use E2E encryption altogether, thus making everything freely available to government by default? How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door?
So instead of building a back door they're just completely removing the option to use E2E encryption altogether, thus making everything freely available to government by default? How is that not worse or at least equivalent to a back door?
It's bad for the citizens of the UK and better for everyone else on the planet with an iPhone. UK citizens should be angry with their government, not Apple.
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…
Feels like marvel was onto something with captain america and winter soldier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on what you’re after * Australia * United States * Singapore * Dubai * Europe (Belgium/Switzerland/Netherlands)
Of the whole list, if the Investigatory Powers Act is what you didn't like, I'd pick Switzerland first, then Belgium/Netherlands. Of course, that assumes you're fluent in the local languages. Hoe goed spreekt u Nederlands? I made a jump to Germany in 2018, and, thanks to learning a new language, have had a front-row seat to how flat the real Dunning Kruger effect really is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dunning–…
That's true, and I suspect Ireland does not do as much surveillance as many other countries, but if I recall correctly, it does have a passphrase-or-prison law like the UK. I also get the sense that in a number of cases, it tends to view its laws as suggestions, for example, with the autism dossiers scandal [1], and in some sense, gets away with it in the way that a small country can. To me, it feels like a country where you don't need to worry about organized, systemic surveillance abuses, but do need to worry about departments or even individual employees who decide that they just don't like you.
[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Health_autism_...
It's the right choice: don't bow to government pressure, let the people pressure the government.
In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.