Britain is waging war on Apple – it is already backfiring
On Dec 2 2015, Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik left their six-month-old daughter and drove to a Christmas party at the disability support facility where he worked. Armed with assault rifles, they opened fire on the attendees, killing 14 and seriously injuring 22, before being killed in a shoot-out with police.
The shooting was America's deadliest terrorist attack since 9/11. It soon emerged that the two had become radicalised online. Islamic State hailed them as 'soldiers of the caliphate'. FBI agents started investigating their online connections, pursuing signs of a wider network or contacts who might have enabled the attack.
Few would have been inclined to stand up for the couple's privacy. But when the FBI asked Apple to unlock an iPhone 5c belonging to Farook, Tim Cook, Apple's chief executive, refused. He argued that creating a backdoor into the iPhone would compromise the security of its hundreds of millions of other users, causing catastrophe if it fell into the wrong hands.
'We have no sympathy for terrorists,' Cook later said, but added: 'The implications of the government's demands are chilling.'
In the end, both Apple and the government got what they wanted. The FBI eventually cracked the phone with the help of an Australian cybersecurity company. Cook kept his promise to customers never to create a backdoor.
But a decade later, Yvette Cooper has picked the same fight.
This month a bombshell report in The Washington Post revealed that the Home Office had secretly ordered Apple to devise a way to break the securely encrypted version of its iCloud storage service.
On Friday, Apple took the nuclear option.
Rather than obey Britain's order to build a backdoor, the company chose to stop offering what is seen as a vital security feature. The company pulled the iCloud encryption feature, known as Advanced Data Protection, from British iPhones.
The move led to widespread criticism of the Home Office from privacy and security campaigners. Apple said it was 'gravely disappointed' by developments.
Cooper is now set for a fight with the world's biggest company, and potentially, the White House. Apple's British customers, meanwhile, have just had their security downgraded.
The battle with Apple has been 13 years in the making.
During the coalition government, the then home secretary Theresa May's plans for a sweeping surveillance bill were torpedoed by the Lib Dems, who labelled it a 'snooper's charter'. But after David Cameron won a Commons majority in 2015, the plans were revived. The Investigatory Powers Act gave the Home Secretary the power to issue encryption-busting notices, which could only be appealed through a secret tribunal.
Apple opposed the law at the time, warning: 'A key left under the doormat would not just be there for the good guys. The bad guys would find it too.'
As the years passed, the threat of being ordered to break encrypted communications and storage seemed to subside. The technology became ubiquitous in messaging apps, and a string of high-profile cyber attacks and relentless scams appeared to settle the argument. Untampered with encryption was the safest option for everyone.
In December, after a widespread Chinese attack on US telecoms networks, US law enforcement officials recommended for the first time that people use end-to-end encryption wherever possible. The warning was signed by agencies in Australia, Canada and New Zealand. It was a clean sweep of the 'Five Eyes' intelligence-sharing nations, with one notable exception: the UK.
Successive British home secretaries have continued to attack end-to-end encryption plans from companies including Facebook. Last year, the Conservative government tightened up surveillance laws, requiring that in some circumstances companies seek secret approval from the Home Office before launching new security features.
'There's a passionately held view in government that it's just wrong for parts of the internet to be off-limits to those charged with lawful protection,' says one intelligence source.
The Home Office has increasingly found itself at odds with Apple, which has made privacy and security major parts of its marketing. In 2023, the company suggested that it would prefer to shut down services such as iMessage and FaceTime in Britain than weaken their protections. It later accused the Government of seeking powers to 'secretly veto' security features.
Some security experts believe that Apple's increasingly strong rhetoric indicates it has been preparing for a secret order for some time, since the Home Office must consult with companies before issuing them.
While Apple does regularly hand data over to security services when asked, Advanced Data Protection, the Apple feature at the heart of the secret notice, encrypts content such as messages and photos in a way that not even the company can access.
Breaking this – as the Government's secret order requires – could involve developing and then installing a custom piece of software on a target's phone, allowing Apple unfettered access to their cloud storage that it could then hand on to law enforcement.
Reports have suggested that the Home Office has demanded a wider 'blanket' capability to read anyone's backups. Peter Sommer, a cybersecurity expert who advised MPs scrutinising surveillance legislation, says this would be disproportionate and unlikely. 'It's technically entirely feasible to break encryption on a per phone basis,' he says.
However, even if the order was targeted, security experts argue that developing the ability to crack an account, even if of a single terrorist, would put others at risk. Creating a master key for every door in town means it is possible that your own door could be unlocked, no matter how well protected.
Cook has made his position clear. Apple told the Home Office last year that it would 'never build a backdoor' and would prefer to remove features like iCloud encryption in Britain rather than comply. When Apple removed the feature on Friday, ministers could not claim they were not warned.
That will not be the end of it, however.
In theory, Apple must still comply with the order, since it could cover overseas accounts. Even if the order is now dropped, Apple will not be satisfied with the new stalemate, where it is left offering a less secure service in a crucial market.
Diplomacy may be a more likely ending. Ron Wyden and Andy Biggs, a Democratic senator and Republican congressman respectively, have written to Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump's new intelligence director, attacking the UK's 'dangerous' and 'short-sighted' efforts, and urging Gabbard to tell the Home Office to back down.
The Trump administration is yet to comment. But Cook, who met the president on Thursday, will be urging him to intervene. While officials reportedly forced Apple to delay the introduction of Advanced Data Protection during Trump's first term, Silicon Valley has since forged strong links with the president, who has vowed to protect them from overseas interference.
Elon Musk, a close adviser to Trump, criticised the UK on Friday, claiming in a post on X that the same thing would have happened in America if last November's presidential election had ended differently.
Ciaran Martin, the former head of GCHQ's National Cyber Security Centre, says that US authorities are unlikely to accept the crackdown.
'If there's no momentum in the US political elite and US society to take on big tech over encryption, which there isn't right now, it seems highly unlikely in the current climate that they're going to stand for another country, however friendly, doing it,' he says.
'The argument is lost. The geopolitical forces and commercial imperatives for the companies make what the Home Office seems to be trying to achieve next to impossible, not just now, but likely in the future.'
By taking on Apple, Cooper may have picked a fight she cannot win. Her Cabinet colleague, Peter Kyle, the Technology Secretary, said last year that tech giants like Apple must be treated as nation states. The Government may be about to get a lesson in what that means.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump's Flawed Message to Los Angeles
President Trump thinks he's sending a message. By deploying waves of National Guard officers and active duty Marines to Los Angeles, he's trying to show that he's powerful and in control, that anyone who protests his policies will pay a price. This is a classic deterrence strategy: hit hard in one place to scare Americans into staying home. But this strategy often backfires. If the majority of protests in Los Angeles reject violence, Mr. Trump may end up proving the opposite of what he intended: that he's afraid, that the protesters are disciplined and that the threat isn't the people — it's him. Counterinsurgency experts have long understood this dynamic. If you want to radicalize a population, there is no faster way than to use disproportionate force against civilians. David Kilcullen, a former senior adviser to General David Petraeus in Iraq, made this clear: Heavy-handed state violence doesn't pacify dissent, it inflames it. Another federal authority, the F.B.I., learned this lesson the hard way. In 1992 at Ruby Ridge in Idaho, an F.B.I. sniper shot and killed the wife of Randy Weaver while she stood in the doorway of her home, holding her baby. The F.B.I. had been called in to back up U.S. marshals who were engaged in a standoff with Mr. Weaver, whom they were trying to arrest on a fugitive warrant. A year later in Waco, Texas, federal agents engaged in a 51-day standoff with the Branch Davidians, a religious sect whose leader, David Koresh, was being investigated for alleged child abuse and the unlawful stockpiling of weapons. The siege ended in disaster: The compound went up in flames and more than 75 people, including at least 20 children, died. Public trust in federal law enforcement plummeted. Militias exploded in size and number. Timothy McVeigh later cited Waco as one of the reasons he bombed the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995. Since then, the F.B.I. has trod carefully when confronting American civilians, especially armed ones. In 2014, after the Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy had long refused to pay federal grazing fees and hundreds of armed supporters faced off with federal agents, law enforcement backed down rather than risk another Waco. And two years after that, during the 2016 occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon (this time led by Mr. Bundy's sons Ammon and Ryan Bundy), the bureau showed patience. For weeks agents avoided direct confrontation, choosing instead to wait, negotiate and de-escalate. It turns out that this strategy is more effective in avoiding violence. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

34 minutes ago
Hong Kong police accuse a mobile game app of promoting armed revolution
HONG KONG -- Hong Kong police on Tuesday accused a mobile game application of advocating armed revolution and promoting secessionist agendas, saying that those who publish it or share it with others online may risk violating national security laws. The announcement — the first to publicly denounce a gaming app — indicates that authorities are widening the crackdown that has followed anti-government protests in 2019. Authorities have crushed or silenced many dissenting voices through prosecutions under the 2020 national security law imposed by Beijing and a similar, homegrown law enacted last year. In a statement, police warned residents against downloading the 'Reversed Front: Bonfire" application, saying those with the app installed might be seen as possessing a publication with a seditious intention. They also warned people against providing financial assistance to the application developer, including making in-app purchases. ''Reversed Front: Bonfire' was released under the guise of a game with the aim of promoting secessionist agendas such as 'Taiwan independence' and 'Hong Kong independence,' advocating armed revolution and the overthrow of the fundamental system of the People's Republic of China,' police said. The game application was developed by ESC Taiwan, which did not immediately respond to The Associated Press' request for comment. On the application's Facebook page, the developer posted about surging searches for the game name and a Hong Kong broadcaster's news report about Tuesday's development. According to the application's introduction, players can assume the role of Hong Kong, Tibet, Uyghur, Taiwan or Cathaysian Rebel factions, among others, to overthrow the communist regime. They may also choose to lead the communists to defeat all enemies. The game's website says it 'is a work of nonfiction. Any similarity to actual agencies, policies or ethnic groups of the PRC in this game is intentional.' On Tuesday night, the app was still available on Apple's App Store but not on the Google Play store. The game publisher last month said Google Play had taken the app down because it did not prohibit users from adopting hateful language in naming. Apple, Google and Meta have not immediately commented. After playing the game for about three months, Kuo Hao Fu in Taiwan said he found that its content uses a humorous approach to describe serious political issues. Fu disagreed with the police accusations, saying players can also choose to be part of the force representing China. 'The Hong Kong police's actions demonstrate how Hong Kong's democratic freedoms have been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party,' he said. 'When even this level cannot be tolerated, it completely destroys creative freedom in gaming.' China considers Taiwan its own territory, to be brought under its control by force if necessary. Many Taiwanese in the self-ruled island showed concerns about Hong Kong's declining freedoms under Beijing's grip. The Beijing and Hong Kong governments insist the city's national security laws were necessary to return stability to the city following the protests.


Tom's Guide
40 minutes ago
- Tom's Guide
WWDC Interview: Apple's Craig Federighi and Greg Joswiak on Siri delay, voice AI as therapist and what's next for Apple Intelligence
For something that was supposed to be a virtual no-show at WWDC 2025, Apple Intelligence wound up having a fairly big presence during the keynote with several new features announced for Apple's various platforms. We're getting Live Translation in iOS 26 across a number of apps, improved Visual Intelligence that can now read your screen, Call Screen and Hold for You in the Phone app and an AI-supercharged Shorcuts app. But there's something big still missing: the new Siri. Yes, Apple continues to work on promised features like understanding your personal context, on-screen awareness and in-app actions. And we have confirmation that 'in the coming year' means 2026 — in other words, after iOS 26 launches this fall. Along with Lance Ulanoff from TechRadar, I sat down with Craig Federighi, Apple's senior vice president of software engineering, and Greg Joswiak, the senior vice president of worldwide marketing, to get a clearer picture of Siri's future. We also discussed Apple's overall approach to AI and how it's fundamentally different than OpenAI and Google Gemini. Apple did deliver a new Siri with iOS 18, with a number of enhancements including a more conversational experience, maintaining context and type to Siri. But some of the most exciting promised features have been delayed. The question is why? We found that the limitations of the V1 architecture weren't getting us to the quality level that we knew our customers needed and we tried to push that out in the state it was going to be in, it would not meet our customer expectations or Apple standards and we had to move to the V2 architecture. "We found that when we were developing this feature that we had, really, two phases, two versions of the ultimate architecture that we were going to create," said Federighi. "Version one we had working here at the time that we were getting close to the conference, and had, at the time, high confidence that we could deliver it. "We thought by December, and if not, we figured by spring, until we announced it as part of WWDC. Because we knew the world wanted a really complete picture of, 'What's Apple thinking about the implications of Apple intelligence and where is it going?'" Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. As it turns out, Apple was simultaneously working on two versions of underlying Siri architecture. V1 was used to build the initial Siri demos. But V2 was needed to deliver a complete solution to customers. "We set about for months, making it work better and better across more app intents, better and better for doing search," said Federighi. "But fundamentally, we found that the limitations of the V1 architecture weren't getting us to the quality level that we knew our customers needed and expected. "We realized that V1 architecture, we could push and push and put in more time, but if we tried to push that out in the state it was going to be in, it would not meet our customer expectations or Apple standards, and that we had to move to the V2 architecture. "As soon as we realized that, and that was during the spring, we let the world know that we weren't going to be able to put that out, and we were going to keep working on really shifting to the new architecture and releasing something." So what's the timetable now? It's not clear, and Apple won't announce a date until the update Siri is fully baked. "We will announce the date when we're ready to seed it, and you're all ready to be able to experience it,' said Federighi. Millions of people are now using ChatGPT with Voice and Gemini Live to chat with daily, whether it's to get answers to everyday questions, help with DIY projects or even life advice. OpenAI's Sam Altman has said that people are using ChatGPT regularly to make life decisions, because the chatbot has the full context of every person in their life and what they've talked about. Many are even starting to use these voice chatbots as stand-in therapists. Federighi isn't down on the concept, but it doesn't sound like Siri will be your next life coach anytime soon. 'As a therapist, it's a reasonable thing to do," said Federighi. 'I know a lot of people find it to be a real powerful way to gather their thoughts, you know, brainstorm, do all kinds of things. And so sure, these are great things but are they the most important thing for Apple to develop well? 'You know, time will tell where we go there, but that's not the main thing we've set out to do at this time.' For Apple, the main message with its AI strategy is that it doesn't want to build a chatbot. Instead, it wants to 'meet people where they are' with AI. That means delivering Apple Intelligence features inside apps that are designed to make your life easier or more fun, such as with the new Call Screening and Hold for Me features in the Phone app and Live Translate in Messages, Phone and FaceTime. So, for example, if you're in the messages app and someone sends you a message in a language that you don't speak, Live Translate will ask if you want it to start translating for you? "It's integrated so it's there within reach whenever you need it in the way you need it with it being contextually relevant and having access to the tools necessary to accomplish what you want to accomplish at that moment," said Federighi. 'Apple's job is to pick figure out the right experiences that make sense in the context of what we offer to customers and to make that technology,' said Joswiak. "The features that you're seeing in Apple Intelligence isn't a destination for us, there's no app on intelligence. [It's about] making all the things you do every day better.' For now, Apple seems focused on delivering AI features that will make an impact as part of its new suite of software rolling out this fall, including iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS 26 Tahoe and even the Apple Watch with watchOS 26 and the new Workout Buddy feature. The features that you're seeing in Apple Intelligence isn't a destination for us, there's no app on intelligence. [It's about] making all the things you do every day better. And Apple is also opening up its large language models to third-party developers so they can tap into Apple Intelligence powers on device. A good example of Apple's AI evolution is Visual Intelligence. The upgrade coming with iOS 26 will let you identify an object on your screen and then instantly buy it on Etsy, for example. 'I didn't limit it just so that we let developers adopt an app and use the intents API. To plug into that experience, so if you have I don't know an app for collecting wine and you want to look up in your wine collector app, you can easily add it to your collection,' said Federighi. Apple Intelligence is still very much a work in progress, but Apple seems focused on delivering the Siri that was promised along with a wide range of AI-powered features that make its ecosystem stickier — even as the competition heats up. 'In the end, people buy products right, they buy experiences, said Joswiak. 'We're very proud of the fact that across each of our hero product categories, we're number one of customer satisfaction right? "There's a reason for that, and we're trying to make those product experiences better and better and make those products better and better and that's what customers care about.'