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

511–520 of 1001 posts

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

#511

Post by rdm_blackhole »

mihaaly wrote: post #492
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 ch…

Exactly, it's the same thing with the Chat Control law in the EU and it reminds me of the scene in the movie Office Space where the consultants are trying to figure out who is doing what in the company.

Basically instead of doing their jobs, the cops expect Apple, Meta et al to intercept all the data, then feed it into some kind of AI black box (not done by them but contracted out to someone else at the taxpayer's expense) that will then decide if you get arrested within the next 48H (I am exaggerating but only slightly)

What are the cops doing instead of doing their jobs? That's my question. Aren't they paid to go out and catch the criminals or do they simply expect to get the identity of people each day that need to be investigated?

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

#512

Post by mihaaly »

tene80i wrote: post #239

I have a naive question, and it's genuine curiosity, not a defence of what's happening here. This ADP feature has only existed for a couple of years, right? I understand people are mad that it's now gone, but why weren't people mad _before_ it existed? For like, a decade? Why do people treat iCloud as immediately dangerous now, if they didn't before? Did they think it was fully encrypted when it wasn't? Did people no…

The situation was not something existed since the beginning of time, it evolved gradually. Long ago not that much and not that many critically private data was circulating the net, it increased and got essential living online by time, in some instances forced in an increasing portion of situations. Worry then had no grounds yet. As exposure of the population grew, so did the benefit for adverse elements breaking online data stores, growing in numbers fast, not all made properly in the headless chase of success. Damage and hence awareness grew gradually.

But basically yes, people are stupid and gave no shit but believed all f nonsense, the marketing frauds made them eating up their crap happy if it had pretty words and pictures, promising something halfway to Paradise. Like the Cloud mirage. Those of careful personality were cautious since the first time Apple and alike pushed on people giving up control over their own data for tiny comfort (or no comfort eventually due to all hostile patterns in the full picture) not putting all and every precious or slightly valuable stuff to some unknown server on the internet protected only by hundreds of years old method: password (so not protected at all essentially). Memories, contacts, schedules, communications, documents, clone of their devices in full, putting all into 'cloud' (much before secure online storage became a thing)? Many times to the very same one? Who are that much idiots, really?!

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

#513

Post by dvtkrlbs »

AlanYx wrote: post #450

Many people might not be aware of it, but Apple publishes a breakdown of the number of government requests for data that it receives, broken down by country. The number of UK requests has ballooned in recent years: https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/gb.html#:~:text=77%... Much of this is likely related to the implementation and automation of the US-UK data access agreement pursuant to the CLOUD Act, which has s…

The problem is AFAIK this act is a lot different and Apple or any party that gets this order is completely forbidden to talk about it. So these kind of requests would not show up in this transparency requests. It is IMHO fair to assume Apple will UK this backdoor given they chose to disable Advanced Data Encryption and public would have no insight to amount and reasons to the backdoor usage. It is really troubling.

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

#514

Post by lilyball »

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…

> 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.

In other words, Apple complies with legal government orders, as they are required to. The government can compel them with a warrant to hand over data that they have, and can prohibit them from talking about it. That's the whole reason for the push towards end-to-end encryption and for not collecting any data Apple doesn't need to operate the products. This also ties into things like photo landmark identification, where Apple designed it such that they don't get any information about the requests and so they don't have any information that they could be compelled to hand to the government.

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

#515

Post by nickburns »

hugh-avherald wrote: post #246
freeqaz wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why it's important to use apps like Signal where you can set the retention of your messages. I've got everybody I know using it now!

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.

Ephemeral messaging is not a crime.

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

#516

Post by nickburns »

sangeeth96 wrote: post #498
fdb345 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

No. That's a civil discovery matter.

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

#517

Post by dvtkrlbs »

sangeeth96 wrote: post #498
fdb345 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I don't think so. Corporate communication is bound by different laws and you have way higher burden of evidence in case of legal requests. I don't think this creates a precedent for personal communications.

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

#518

Post by scott_w »

onei wrote: post #488
scott_w wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear: Wallace is not a head of state, or even an MP any more. At one point, he was Secretary of State for Defence, a Cabinet position, however he resigned this in 2023. This doesn’t justify his position (it’s stupid) but he doesn’t speak for the current government.

To clarify a bit further, the UK head of state is King Charles III, as he is for a bunch of other countries in the Commonwealth. Head of state in the UK is a bit weird compared to countries that abolished or never had a monarchy.

You’re correct, however I gave GP the benefit of the doubt and assumed they meant Secretary of State ;-)

And, to be fair, while I’m generally a small r republican, I’m seeing benefits of having a non politically aligned head of state after J6. While the monarch has limited power, booting out a PM that can’t command the confidence of Parliament is one of them. The question of whether Johnson would accept being dethroned a la Trump was always silly given his consent was never needed.

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

#519

Post by mihaaly »

multimoon wrote: post #187
ta8645 wrote: post #135

Free speech already under threat and now y'all are giving up the right of private communication too? For anyone cheering this on, do you honestly think this will only affect the "bad people", and you'll never have your own neck under the government's boot? Even if you trust the government today, what happens when your neighbors elect a government you disagree with ideologically?

I don’t think anyone is cheering this on.

Instead of the word cheering we could use letting.

Bad people flourish over the inaction of good people.

(but yes, there are always several who protect and argue for things risking their own and everyone's livelihood, exposing themselves to shady elements, along singled out and elevated thin aspects, cannot understood why)

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

#520

Post by AutistiCoder »

IshKebab wrote: post #304
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. Meta also said they would make a stand if a similar request comes for WhatsApp. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

They wouldn't even be able to.

WA is end-to-end encrypted.

Post reply on HN