Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered by UK to Create Global iCloud Encryption Backdoor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have, what's your point? Russia invaded end of story. Now with it's normal playbook being replayed in other countries right now to obtain Putin's often stated goal of recreating the empire.
You probably think Letby is guilty too. Follow the money. Follow the real science. Both FBI and CIA have now said lab leak is most likely scenario. Gain of function was funded by USAID. It's crazy that it happened, yes, but it is true.
Governing via regulation is convenient and flexible, but it allows sweeping changes in the effects of a law without oversight by elected representatives and far less awareness and engagement by the public.
The IPA looked scary if you read it, but the devil is in the details which aren't attached when the law is proclaimed. Those come later in regulations drawn inside cabinet offices without oversight.
Search any Act for the ability to promulgate regulations. The key words are: "may by regulations" or "may by order".
The Canadian equivalent would be searching for "Governor In Council" for the equivalent sweeping regulatory powers.
Let's just look at the UK's Highways Act: there are 7 instances where regulations can change on a whim without legislative oversight. There are a further 18 instances where orders can be issued. The Investigatory Powers Act (2016) has 18 places where regulations can be promulgated without Parliament.
The Secretary of State has sole discretion of what is required and the Judicial Commissioner review can be done completely in private.
The IPA looked scary if you read it, but the devil is in the details which aren't attached when the law is proclaimed. Those come later in regulations drawn inside cabinet offices without oversight.
Your country invented the idea of governing via order in modern deliberative democracies.
Search any Act for the ability to promulgate regulations. The key words are: "may by regulations" or "may by order".
The Canadian equivalent would be searching for "Governor In Council" for the equivalent sweeping regulatory powers.
Let's just look at the UK's Highways Act: there are 7 instances where regulations can change on a whim without legislative oversight. There are a further 18 instances where orders can be issued. The Investigatory Powers Act (2016) has 18 places where regulations can be promulgated without Parliament.
The IPA (2016) allows for exactly what is being reported upon here to be done with no Parliamentary oversight. See section 253: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/section/253
The Secretary of State has sole discretion of what is required and the Judicial Commissioner review can be done completely in private.
No it's not. The CIA was given a new head who has said for years, without evidence, that he thought it was a lab leak, and then magically the CIA's position on the subject immediately changed once he was confirmed. The evidence didn't change, the leader did.
I'm not saying a lab leak is impossible, but we'll likely never know one way or the other. All the scientific journals that have looked at it have said it jumping from animals to humans at the Wuhan market is by far the most likely scenario, but we'll never have 100% certainty.
But what I can say that the evidence hasn't changed, and USAID certainly didn't have a role in "creating" COVID.
The courts aren't really that much more partisan than they ever were.
For a few decades, the Supreme Court used to be leaning Progressive and the conservatives complained that this was a leftist coup and the judges were legislating from the bench.
Now the Supreme Court is leaning Conservative and it's the Democrats complaining in essentially the same words.
From my observation, people who make it to Supreme Court are usually more interested in law (specifically, Constitution) than their personal beliefs. Just look at the way their votes often split, it's not strictly Conservative vs Liberal.
Is BBC reputable enough for you?
UK government demands access to Apple users' encrypted data
The Home Office served the notice to the tech giant under the Investigatory Powers Act.
www.bbc.com
This has got to be satire
The current Supreme Court is hyper partisan and capricious at best on what they choose to pluck out of the Constitution, how and when or why
You may be right, sadly, but time will tell, and yes, I am optimistic that this will likely come to nothing, since it would open the way to back doors in everything and there are other players and organisations that will also push back just as hard as Apple will.
I hope you're right
Which other players, with any leverage or power, would you say I should be watching out to see what they do (or not)?
I think they can leave and give us some bs PR reason that absolves them of any legal liability
From BBC article:
"withdrawing the product from the UK might not be enough to ensure compliance - the Investigatory Powers Act applies worldwide to any tech firm with a UK market, even if they are not based in Britain."
So does this mean that Apple would have to stop any business with UK?
"withdrawing the product from the UK might not be enough to ensure compliance - the Investigatory Powers Act applies worldwide to any tech firm with a UK market, even if they are not based in Britain."
So does this mean that Apple would have to stop any business with UK?
All the major technology vendors operate in the UK. Google & Microsoft for example. All the big social media players. The actions of the UK government will also apply to the telecoms providers (who are already heavily impacted by IPA). This list is long.
I must admit I’m a bit amused by the outrage of US citizens about the audacity of another government spying on them.
The rest of the world has been in that exact situation for 10 years.
It seems like every country is going down the path of wanting more and more control. And here people are seriously arguing which country is slightly less terrible for the moment. ("At least we don’t …")
Everybody, get active to protect democracy. At least you’ll know you’ve tried.
So the UK demand includes back door access to every location where there is an iCloud? Including the US. Did I get that right?
I think a major reason for the discrepancy is because there's such a large difference in how the two concepts – ID cards, and encryption of personal data – are portrayed when being simplified in the media.
The former is always about being an intrusion into individual liberties, while the latter is always framed around what the bad actors can use it for.
Sounds like that's the gist of the request.
And it feels quite brazen, and similar in fashion to what's often originating in the USA, tbf.
Translation:
…but maybe the government can - with a key or capability that Google doesn’t have.
The EU make lots of demands in the name of consumer rights... the UK has lost its mind since Brexit... That this law makes it a crime for apple to confirm the request and then lie about it if implemented shows you how far off center their minds are...
What really is extreme is that they want a backdoor to ALL iCloud data, not just that of users within the UK, but everyone's data... Where does that make sense? How could they possibly think Apple would cave to this?
Remember that allied countries use each others services to act against their own citizens.
Information collected by the UK on US citizens, can be shared with the US government.
I don’t claim to know, but it’s possible the request for this came from the US government, and would give them legal access to iCloud users world wide.
They would already have access, but that can never be used in court. This would push the legal boundary to possibly allow iCloud data in legal proceedings or in dark court proceedings against US and non US citizens.
Information collected by the UK on US citizens, can be shared with the US government.
I don’t claim to know, but it’s possible the request for this came from the US government, and would give them legal access to iCloud users world wide.
They would already have access, but that can never be used in court. This would push the legal boundary to possibly allow iCloud data in legal proceedings or in dark court proceedings against US and non US citizens.
Last edited: