logo
British Government's Encryption Row With Apple ‘Really Strange,' Expert Says

British Government's Encryption Row With Apple ‘Really Strange,' Expert Says

Epoch Times23-04-2025

The government's position in its privacy and encryption row with Apple is 'really strange' and 'doesn't make sense,' an expert has said.
Earlier this year, it was reported that the government had issued a notice under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, asking Apple for the ability to access data from Apple users.
This was said to include encrypted data protected by the tech giant's advanced data protection (ADP) tool, an opt-in tool within Apple's iCloud service which only an account holder can access, and is currently out of the reach of even Apple.
The iPhone-maker subsequently said that it was withdrawing the tool from use in the UK, turning it off as an option for those not already using it, and will introduce a process to move existing users away from it, and brought legal action against the Home Office.
Robin Wilton, senior director for internet trust at the Internet Society, a non-profit organisation which advocates for a safe and accessible internet for all, said he did not understand the government's approach.
He said he believed it was unlikely the iCloud backups of Apple users would be a likely place for bad actors to keep records of their crimes.
Related Stories
4/8/2025
4/7/2025
'I don't really see what they're expecting to achieve by this,' he told the PA news agency.
'I know that the standard answer is 'well, we'll catch the dumb criminals,' but for anyone sufficiently motivated, this seems like a really simple thing to bypass.
'And how many people are actually inadvertently or otherwise storying evidence of criminal activity in their iCloud backups? To that extent, it doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me.'
The government's approach was widely criticised by online privacy campaigners and experts when reports of the request first appeared, and Wilton said the UK's stance could create trust issues in other areas of technology, including artificial intelligence (AI).
'I think there are some negative aspects to it as well which, in the context of this government, I find really bizarre,' he told PA.
'We've heard this government talk a lot about its expectations for AI and machine learning, to kickstart the UK economy.
'And the way I look at that is, I don't think that any AI worth having is going to run exclusively on your device—it's either going to make calls to a server or it's actually just going to be processed on the server and it'll fire a result back to you.
'So, what's the status of the stuff that happens on the server? Is that yours or or is that under the custody of the company running the server?
'This government's approach seems to be that it's not yours and that it's fair game.
'So if stuff that runs on other people's computers at my request or on my behalf is fair game, like iCloud backups, then I don't see why AI systems would be treated any differently.
'And therefore, why would I trust those systems with anything sensitive or confidential, let alone criminal.'
Last week, the Home Office lost a bid to keep the legal action brought by Apple against the government private.
Last month the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, a specialist tribunal which deals with allegations of unlawful intrusion and some national security matters, sat behind closed doors for an all-day hearing, where the identities of the parties involved were not publicly known.
However, in a public judgment last Monday, judges at the tribunal said the case relates to legal action brought against the Home Office by Apple over the power to make technical capability notices under the Investigatory Powers Act.
Following that ruling the Home Office said it did not comment on legal proceedings or operational issues, but its first priority was to 'keep people safe,' and stressed it was not seeking blanket data access.
However, Wilton said that the government's stance could leave it open to other legal challenges in the future.
'I think this government's position is really strange,' he said.
'The prime minister must know, as a lawyer, that the EU already considers your mobile device to be part of your so-called private sphere, because it is so intimately linked to your life.
'And I don't see how you can look at that and think that the fact that I've allowed my device to back itself up in an encrypted way to the cloud means that I have a lower expectation of privacy than I do for what's on the device itself.
'So I think this government is laying itself open for challenges to this based on the Human Rights Act, on the basis that the encrypted data in my iCloud backup should be considered to be part of my personal and private sphere.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Apple's woes deepen following Epic Games ruling. Here's where we stand on the stock now
Apple's woes deepen following Epic Games ruling. Here's where we stand on the stock now

CNBC

time16 minutes ago

  • CNBC

Apple's woes deepen following Epic Games ruling. Here's where we stand on the stock now

Apple suffered a major blow in its bid to alleviate one of Jim Cramer's biggest worries about the tech giant: its legal fight with Fortnite maker Epic Games. A U.S. appeals court late Wednesday rejected Apple's plea to halt mandated changes to its App Store that the company has warned could cost it "substantial sums." "Apple's had a bad streak. This is just more negativity," Jim said Thursday. Shares of Apple fell about 0.7% in Thursday's session, trading slightly above $201 apiece. The stock is down roughly 19% so far this year. The ruling Wednesday evening marked the latest setback for Apple in its long-running legal battle with Epic Games, which first sued the iPhone maker in 2020 in an attempt to force Apple to loosen its grip on purchases in apps that utilize its iOS operating system. In late April, a U.S. district judge said Apple was violating a four-year-old ruling that required Apple to change the way it charges commissions on in-app purchases. The solution that Apple implemented in early 2024 , for the first time, allowed developers to include links to external websites where iPhone app users could put in their payment info. However, Apple still charged a 27% commission on in-app transactions that linked out for payments and told developers how these links should be presented. The judge's April ruling said Apple needed to stop those practices. Now, Apple's request to have that decision paused has been denied. Wall Street analysts say this could dent Apple's financials – albeit not by that much. For example, Morgan Stanley estimated that 2% of Apple's earnings per share, 10% of App Store revenue and 3% of overall revenue for its important services division are at risk if the ruling is upheld. The basis for those forecasts is the firm's proprietary survey from May, which found that 28% of U.S. iPhone users are "extremely likely" to circumvent in-app purchases in the App Store. Despite the Epic ruling late last month, App Store growth has remained solid in May. Net revenues for the App Store increased 9.6% year over year in May, compared with an 8% year-over-year gain in April, according to Morgan Stanley, citing Sensor Tower data. "To date, our view has been the App Store injunction is a minor risk to the Apple story / a longer-tailed risk, as changing nearly 20 years of learned consumer behavior doesn't happen overnight," the analysts wrote in a Thursday note. The firm reiterated its buy-equivalent rating on the stock. JPMorgan shared similar sentiments. The analysts projected a "moderation" in services revenue growth and an up to 3% hit to earnings per share. "Although the denial of a stay is a headwind for Apple, we continue to believe the magnitude of impact is likely to be materially lower than currently being feared by investors," wrote the JPMorgan analysts, who also have a buy-equivalent rating on shares. While Jim indicated Thursday that Apple taking a 2% to 3% hit to EPS from the Epic case is a fair assumption, he expressed frustration with the overall implications of the ruling. "I think it is outrageous that they can use Apple as the equivalent of a common carrier, a Greyhound bus," Jim said Thursday. The Apple-Epic saga is one of the reasons why the stock has become such a worrisome position in recent months, Jim explained during our May Monthly Meeting. But it is not the only threat facing Apple's services division, which has long been a big part of our investment thesis in the company. The business — home to the App Store, AppleCare, ApplePay, iCloud and content subscriptions like Apple TV+ — is coveted for the recurring nature of its revenue streams and high margins. AAPL YTD mountain Apple's year-to-date stock performance. The other big risk to Apple's services business is Alphabet -owned Google's legal feud with the Justice Department. The antitrust case threatens Google's massive annual payments to Apple in exchange for being the default search provider on iPhone and iPad devices. In 2022, that was worth $20 billion for Apple. During the May Monthly Meeting , Jim described the matter as potentially "easy money gone," adding that investors "need to be concerned." Apple's woes don't stop there, though. Jim has an Apple worry even bigger than services growth: higher tariffs on electronics imports into the U.S. Last month, President Donald Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Apple by at least 25% for iPhones not made in the U.S. That does not bode well for the Club name because it's the company's biggest money maker. Plus, it's nearly impossible for Apple to get this done in the short term as the majority of its manufacturing is done overseas. CEO Tim Cook has tried to reduce Apple's reliance on China by diversifying its supply chain and expanding production into India. It hasn't been enough to appease Trump, though. All of this comes ahead of Apple's annual developers conference, which kicks off Monday. It has historically coincided with the start of a seasonally strong period for the stock. Investors will be closely watching what Apple says about its generative artificial intelligence system, dubbed Apple Intelligence. We previously thought that the suite of AI tools would usher in a much-needed upgrade cycle for the iPhone. This hasn't been the case as the rollout of new flashy features have been staggered and delayed. Still, we're not planning to bail on Apple shares down here. While there are clearly issues hanging over the stock, there's no denying its products are among the best consumer electronics in the world. As long as people aren't trading in their iPhones and leaving the Apple ecosystem, the ability to make money off that huge user base remains intact. And that's reason enough to stay in the stock. (Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust is long AAPL. See here for a full list of the stocks.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.

Save $269 on our favorite open-back headphones and experience music in a whole new way
Save $269 on our favorite open-back headphones and experience music in a whole new way

Digital Trends

time20 minutes ago

  • Digital Trends

Save $269 on our favorite open-back headphones and experience music in a whole new way

We may have recently given Sennheiser a bit of flack for launching earbuds that look like AirPods (which is a pretty common thing to do) but that doesn't mean they don't have audiophile-grade offerings. The open-back Sennheiser HD 660S2 are a pretty good example of that. They probably flew under your radar, though, because of their standard price in excess of $600. They're typically rank No. 2 by cost in our list of the best headphones, right after the $1,000+ Dali IO-12. But, right now, with this 40% discount, they're actually cheaper than Apple's AirPods Max. So, if you want to check out audiophile headphones for $411 (that's $269 off their usual price of $680) be sure to tap the button below. Or, keep reading for our take. Why you should buy the Sennheiser HD 660S2 As counterintuitive as it may sound, open-back headphones can absolutely provide a premium sound. The Sennheiser HD 660S2 act as a sort of antonym to the shut-out-the-world ethic of the Sony WH-1000XM6 and not at all in a bad way. These headphones have plush ear cushions with a hefty amount of clamp on the head and an overall minimalist design, though you won't always think of it that way as you peer into the guts of the headphones that their closed-back cousins keep hidden. Our Sennheiser HD 660S2 review calls their sound 'effortless' and says, 'It just springs forth and gently bathes you in its detail, instead of pummeling you, which I now recognize as a possible side effect of closed-back headphones.' Be sure to give the review a read through to see how to get the full audiophile experience from your new HD 660S2s, as well as to get insights on the full extent of how open-back headphones can transform your music listening experience. These audiophile headphones aren't typically down to $411. It's an incredible discount of $269 off of the usual $680 price, making them way more competitive than usual. So, if you want them, don't wait for this deal to go away. However, if you want something else, you should be sure to check out the other best headphone deals going on right now.

Apple loses bid to halt court ruling that blocks some fees from its iPhone app store
Apple loses bid to halt court ruling that blocks some fees from its iPhone app store

Washington Post

time22 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

Apple loses bid to halt court ruling that blocks some fees from its iPhone app store

SAN FRANCISCO — A three-judge appeals panel rejected Apple's request to pause an April 30 order banning the company from charging a fee on in-app iPhone transactions processed outside its once-exclusive payment system in a two-page decision issued late Thursday. The setback threatens to divert billions of dollars in revenue away from Apple while it tried to overturn the order reining in its commissions from e-commerce within iPhone apps.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store