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

Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 785 posts

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#411

Post by anigbrowl »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #58
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #40

i simply prefer not to believe anything that any government or any trillion dollar company says about encryption and privacy. Apple: > "We have never heard of PRISM", "We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers" https://web.archive.org/web/20130609061546/https://www.culto... ..some things are just not discussed on public forums.

As far as "We have never heard of PRISM", that could be true. When you receive a national security letter it isn't like they give you detailed info about the specific operation and why you are receiving it. It's more along the lines of "you're going to do this pursuant to US code section..."

It might not be cited on any given NSL, but saying they've never heard of it when it's received ample news coverage is disingenuous.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#412

Post by ohgodplsno »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #332
ohgodplsno wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lack creativity. You have multiple billions available for that. Where do you want your remains to disappear ? Hell, even sharks with lasers isn't far fetched with that amount of money. But all playfulness aside: * Pay professional hitmen. * Pay a hobo enough to go beat you up in your home. * Pay enough people enough money to kill you pretty much anywhere. What are they going to do, plead in front of a judge that…

> * Pay professional hitmen You mean, pay an undercover cop who is advertising himself as a professional hitman? > * Pay a hobo enough to go beat you up in your home. He'll pay the hobo, and hobo will run off with the money > all they saw was a subordinate of a subordinate of a subordinate This is even more crazy than the earlier suggestions. You think there is going to be a chain of subordinates at apple who will al…

"My favorite multinational trillion dollar worth conglomerate that has a history of not caring about human rights when it comes to the production of their devices surely would never do that!"

You're naïve. Less than 100 years ago the Pinkertons were still murdering workers and nothing happened to them.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#413

Post by leptons »

JPws_Prntr_Fngr wrote: post #328
nashashmi wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actions like this is why I used to trust Google. Fighting government overreach should have been a critical part of technology and data. But it seems Google was more political in its relationships than idealistic. And now the entire sector is compromised. Apple will be one day compromised too. In some crevice of some unknown government office is a person working on a ten-year initiative to get access to inaccessible i…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM Apple is a participant in the NSA's PRISM mass surveillance program. They've been compromised for a long time. I doubt any decent sized corporation isn't.

Exactly this. When some government makes a big public proposal to invade privacy, Apple will speak up with bravado. But they won't say a word in all the other cases when a government demands to invade privacy when those demands are made in secret.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#414

Post by cmitsakis »

obituary_latte wrote: post #2

Stuff like this is why I'm an Apple fanboy. I'm happy to pay a premium and be locked into their walled garden for some things if it means supporting a company that has the power to shift policy in favor of human rights (privacy in this case).

The fact that there are companies that have the power to shift public policy is the problem. Because they use that power for their interests that don't align with our interests.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#415

Post by bloqs »

dmbche wrote: post #208
_cenw wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> voluntarily downloading an app that's all true until an app becomes the only way to interact with certain groups of people. i certainly wouldn't call my usage of Discord voluntary. it doesn't actually matter how often i read their privacy policy and shake my head. either I break off contact with a large part of the internet that's important to me or I begrudgingly agree "voluntarily" to their terms and conditions.

May I ask, what compels you to use discord if it's not voluntary? It's absolutely impossible to use keybase or signal?

You clearly dont have many friends or relatives that you actually interact with

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#416

Post by hayd »

daveoc64 wrote: post #407
Roark66 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if the UK ever decides to have a written constitution. On one hand they've been doing fine without one for centuries. On the other if this law passes the parliament that's it. There is no "constitutional court" to strike it down. No "president" to "not sign it". Etc.

The problem with relying on a written consititution is that it can easily be changed. The USA is in a position where it seems to be perpetually stuck in a 50/50 split of the elected government, so it's not possible for major constitutional reform to be passed by one party. On the other hand, the current government in the UK has a majority of 80 MPs - if there was a written constitution, it's likely they could simply…

In the US you need a super majority (of legislators or states) to amend the constitution. You'd have to do something like that. But the UK government system isn't really set up like this, there aren't the checks-and-balances of the US. (It's just civil servants undemocratically dragging their feet/slowing down processes they disagree with... which is not democratic.)

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#417

Post by ohgodplsno »

jrockway wrote: post #298
peoplefromibiza wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How exactly does he do it? Just imagine this: Tim Cook travel expenses amount to an half a million dollar per year. travel expenses only. A professional hit man costs between 1/100th and 1/33th of that. Tim has to simply give up on a pair of new shoes that year.

Are you saying that the internal accounting controls at Apple are so lax that Tim Cook can pay contractors off the books out of his own travel expenses? I also imagine the post-arrest interview of the $5000 hitman going like this: "You're charged with Murder 1, which is a capital offense in this state. Are you ready to die for $5000?" "Tim Cook made me do it."

Yes, misuse and misappropriation of funds is such an uncommon event for fortune 500 companies. Especially the CEO, they have to justify every little expense!

In what wonder world are you living?

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#418

Post by jmull »

paxys wrote: post #207

The same Apple that lets the CCP operate its entire App Store in China? It's easy to criticize a government when you know there will be no retaliation. To judge a company's true stance on such issues see how they behave when there's a prospect of real financial loss.

This kind of black and white thinking is defeatist.

China: already a lost cause (before iPhones and messaging existed, in fact).

The UK: a leading western nation.

Let's try to have western countries not be like China? The UK could be a domino... if it falls the authoritarians in other western countries may be emboldened to follow.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#419

Post by vbo »

I feel we've been collectively losing the battle to keep our conversations private. The anti-encryption laws are likely vocally opposed only by a minority, while the majority believes they had no privacy to begin with and governments can read your messages at a whim. And perhaps that's true to some extent. But since most people believe the battle is lost, moreso that this has always been the status quo, then any battle on the subject is lost before it has a chance to begin. We have capitulated on privacy, because it's a vague concept and we don't equate it with freedom, or perhaps our sense of being free is so ingrained in modern societies that we see no risk to it being lost lest something drastic and immediate takes it away, when in fact the very system designed to protect our freedoms (led by people that look like us, think like us and enjoy these freedoms as much as we do) is malfunctioning and slowly erodes rights that previous generations enjoyed. We're not collectively trying to harm our freedoms and yet here we are.

And shortsightedness on the side of lawmakers is baffling. Nobody takes responsibility for vision, we just go along with implementing solutions without considering broader impact or history. If the government has all your correspondence and the government falls into the wrong hands, you're toast, assuming you do not align with the leadership. We're writing that possibility off, but someone gets to brag that they've written legislation to stop the bad guys -- and maybe they did, but the cost was our collective freedom.

Post reply on HN