Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Encryption Security United Kingdom Apple

Apple Removes Cloud Encryption Feature From UK After Backdoor Order 116

Apple is removing its most advanced, end-to-end encrypted security feature for cloud data in the United Kingdom [alternative source], in a stunning development after the government ordered the company to build a backdoor for accessing user data. From a report: The company said Friday that Advanced Data Protection, an optional feature that adds end-to-end encryption to a wide assortment of user data is no longer available in the UK for new users.

This layer of security covers iCloud data storage, device backups, web bookmarks, voice memos, notes, photos, reminders and text message backups. "We are gravely disappointed that the protections provided by ADP will not be available to our customers in the UK given the continuing rise of data breaches and other threats to customer privacy," the company said in a statement. "ADP protects iCloud data with end-to-end encryption, which means the data can only be decrypted by the user who owns it, and only on their trusted devices."

Apple Removes Cloud Encryption Feature From UK After Backdoor Order

Comments Filter:
  • This ought to be a warning that any data stored in "the cloud" is not secure and can be accessed at any time at the whim of authorities. Better encrypt the files before you store them in the cloud, or keep files locally so you can keep control of your data. I imagine other countries will be looking to this too, seeing how easily Apple caved into the British Government.
    • by Mascot ( 120795 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @10:45AM (#65184755)

      In what way is this caving? If it's local law, they have to comply or leave the market. They're obviously not going to just pull out of the UK as a market, so instead of making data insecure for all of their customers by building a backdoor, they chose to comply by removing that feature in the UK. That is clearly the lesser of two evils, and the only ones in the wrong here are the UK government.

      • Not Enough? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Roger W Moore ( 538166 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:00AM (#65184799) Journal
        I doubt it will be enough though to comply though. A backdoor would give the UK government access to the data of everyone in the UK, even if those people are there temporarily. If this removes the feature for only UK users it will mean that non-UK users visiting the UK will still have inaccessible data. It seems unlikely that it will remove encryption the instant you enter the UK for non-UK users and I suspect that will make the government unhappy.
        • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

          by saloomy ( 2817221 )
          This governs "cloud data in the United Kingdom". Why not offer those users American data at slower access speeds maintaining encryption? Honestly, the only way these governments will get the hint is if the politicians who advocate for this nonsense have their lives destroyed by exposing them with hacking their newly unencrypted iCloud data. I bet there are interesting keychain and iMessage data to be exposed for all of them.
          • Why not offer those users American data at slower access speeds maintaining encryption?

            Almost certainly because that would be against the law. The UK government has strange laws when it comes to encryption. When I was a kid growing up there I remember getting interested in a way to transmit digital data over the newly opened CB radio spectrum - this was in the pre-WIFi days - and then learning that it was technically illegal in the UK because it fell foul of laws banning any "encrypted" radio transmissions. I had no idea why the UK would have a law like that until my dad suggested that it pr

            • by Hadlock ( 143607 )

              Unlicensed radio use in the US also has to be unencrypted, it kind of makes sense it's a public resource. It makes browsing the web via public radio difficult as you technically need to decrypt the https and send it plaintext including usernames and passwords etc

              • by ukoda ( 537183 )
                So where does WiFi sit under that? WiFi is unlicensed and encrypted.
                • He overstated the case. AMATEUR radio use in the US must be unencrypted. Unlicensed use doesn't have to be. Amateur use is licensed. WiFi is unlicensed.

                  • by ukoda ( 537183 )
                    Good, that is inline with what I understood. I guess if you wanted be pedantic amateur radio Q codes could be classified as encryption. Then again I guess people wouldn't care if I had to QSY because of QRM at my QTH.
          • They still do. Anyone can open an American iCloud account. It's very easy.
        • I suspect that will make the government unhappy

          Sure. But if lets say the German government figures out that the UK government wants unlimited access to phones of German iPhones users, then they will secretly declare every UK MP to be a spy, and ask Apple to secretly supply all phone information of all UK spies. Plus the real spies at MI5, MI6 and so on.

      • by organgtool ( 966989 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @12:32PM (#65185081)

        In what way is this caving? If it's local law, they have to comply or leave the market.

        Apple wouldn't have to voluntarily leave the market, they would probably face fines at first. If they just kept paying the fines and defying the government, that could force the UK government to decide if they need to kick them out. While the end result would be the same, members of the UK government depend on votes to keep their jobs and that would be difficult to maintain if UK citizens lose access to their precious iDevices.

        Instead, Apple took the path of malicious compliance. The UK government wanted to have access their citizens' data and Apple provided that, albeit in a way very different from how the UK government intended. I feel bad for UK citizens since they're caught in the middle, but they elected the government that is pushing for this behavior and hopefully Apple can help the government realize how daft they're being.

        • by ukoda ( 537183 )
          Malicious compliance was the right choice. "just kept paying the fines and defying the government" would only work short term as the government would get pissed and simply increase the fines until it became impossible to pay, like when a Russian court has fined Google two undecillion roubles.
          • They did the correct thing here. If they provided a backdoor, it was only a matter of time before that backdoor was discovered and exploited and they would be liable for the damages caused by that breach. In this case they are removing the encryption all together so there is no backdoor for anyone to breach. I would love for there to be a way for the "good guys" to have access to the "bad guy's" data only, but there is virtually no way to provide that without exposing everyone else's data and give them a
        • Instead, Apple took the path of malicious compliance.

          No they didn't. There's nothing malicious in the way they complied with this order. They are removing an encryption feature. That said Apple offered an alternative minimum token gesture which may not meet the requirements of the order at all so not only not malicious but may not even qualify as compliance.

          The idea here is to show your willingness to comply while continuing to parrot the line they have used to governments all over the world "compliance is technically not possible in the way requested".

          • They did not comply with the order. What they did, was sound the canary in the coal mine as to what is happening by preventing new attempts to enrol in Advanced Data Protection. They will still continue to encrypt iMessage, FaceTime, passwords, location data and other things the UK government wants access to using end-to-end encryption and those already enrolled in ADP will be keeping access for now.

            This is going to create a nightmare for lawmakers, as they partially complied with the order in the only w
            • by Luthair ( 847766 )
              Did they though - as I read it they've turned off encryption for new users, and in the future will disable encryption for existing users. I'm not a believer in this law, but Apple could have readily stored encryption key encrypted with both the user's and a gov key; this would limit decryption to the user, and whomever holds the governments key. Instead Apple took their ball and went home, now anyone who can access the data can read it - Apple employees, hackers, etc.
            • It's compliance, they did comply with the order by withdrawing a service that would have conflicted with it.

              When you want to provide a service but the law interferes with your ability to provide the service, you have three options:

              1) Comply, and don't provide the service.
              2) Comply, and provide a modified version of the service that's legal
              3) Do not comply, provide the service anyway unchanged and face the consequences

              Apple chose (1). (2) was unacceptable to Apple, it would have compromised the security of t

      • If a platform has a reset password feature it has a backdoorâ¦
    • by battingly ( 5065477 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @10:49AM (#65184761)

      That's not how iCloud works. The data is almost never in the form of files which the user could encrypt.

      • Depends on what it is you're doing. If you're talking about backing up the contents of your photo gallery then sure it's done in the background without any opportunity to encrypt. But iCloud as with all cloud services allows you sync files individually as well. As long as they are encrypted on your phone they'll be encrypted on the cloud. It just requires effort on behalf of the user.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Indeed, Apple appears to be saying that the poor security of iCloud is now putting UK users at risk.

      It's interesting that it only applies to new users. The UK wants a backdoor into existing user's accounts as well, so Apple still hasn't complied with their demand. They could roll out a software update that sends the keys to Apple on request, which is doubtless what the UK government will want.

      • They could roll out a software update that sends the keys to Apple on request, which is doubtless what the UK government will want.

        Finally, somebody gets it. Every time this discussion comes up, the majority of the comments are "but if you compromise the algorithm with a backdoor, the bad guys will get in too!" There is absolutely no need for a backdoor in the algorithm when you've got a $5 wrench law which requires a company to retain a copy of users' keys.

        Yeah, it's still a security risk having the same entity holding your cloud data also having the keys to the kingdom, but that's always the risk when government starts swinging th

        • by Nebulo ( 29412 )

          There is absolutely no need for a backdoor in the algorithm when you've got a $5 wrench law which requires a company to retain a copy of users' keys.

          Yeah, it's still a security risk having the same entity holding your cloud data also having the keys to the kingdom, but that's always the risk when government starts swinging their $5 wrench.

          ...that's a backdoor. Literally, a backdoor. Perhaps not in code, but in policy, and equally dangerous.

          • ...that's a backdoor. Literally, a backdoor. Perhaps not in code, but in policy, and equally dangerous.

            Yes, in policy and that's what people here just keep overlooking. You can't win what is an argument over policy by disingenuously stating that what they want is not technically possible (the example most frequently given is that the algorithm itself would have to be compromised). Yes, it absolutely is possible to grant the government access to encrypted data without having to compromise the algorithm, you're just not going to like what it entails.

            This is entirely the deeper meaning behind the XKCD comic s

        • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

          You are seriously suggesting that Apple should keep a copy of every user's decryption key?

          And somehow you think that this is not a back door?

          • You are seriously suggesting that Apple should keep a copy of every user's decryption key?

            They could, if ordered to by law. That's not the same as saying I think they should, nor is pointing out that that it's a possible outcome an endorsement of a government that isn't protecting the privacy of its citizens. Damn, reading comprehension on this site has taken a nosedive post-Covid.

            And somehow you think that this is not a back door?

            It's a matter of perspective. I just posted the key to some random Bitcoin wallet in another discussion. You wouldn't say there's a backdoor to Bitcoin's encryption because people can sometimes be careless with the

      • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        Indeed, Apple appears to be saying that the poor security of iCloud is now putting UK users at risk.

        It's interesting that it only applies to new users. The UK wants a backdoor into existing user's accounts as well, so Apple still hasn't complied with their demand. They could roll out a software update that sends the keys to Apple on request, which is doubtless what the UK government will want.

        It's not the security of the iCloud service. That stuff is, effectively, stored unencrypted on Apple's servers. It m

      • It's interesting that it only applies to new users

        The reason is quite obvious. Apple has to make software changes and these are changes that you would want to be extremely reliable and safe. For new users, all that Apple has to do is disable a button or checkbox in the user interface so that users can't turn the feature on. For existing users, they have to develop a user interface that tells users the feature is gone at the right moment, and then they have to disable the feature.

        In this case the security feature was not holding a copy of the encryption

    • by XXongo ( 3986865 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:24AM (#65184849) Homepage

      I imagine other countries will be looking to this too, seeing how easily Apple caved into the British Government.

      Apple did the opposite of caving in to the British Government. When the British Government demanded a back door into encrypted systems, they stopped the service rather than insert a back door.

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Basically, instead of saying "We'll make it secure against everyone except the UK government", they said "We're not going to make it secure against ANYONE, which means that while the UK government will be able to see it if they need to, their enemies will potentially be able to see it too".
        • Really what is happening here is they are saying "We will only allow our default encryption for which we hold the keys and can be forced to divulge information via court order" and removed the "We let our customer hold the keys and we have no way to comply with a court order" option. iCloud in either case is as secure as any other vendor in the space where the keys are held by the vendor (such as google).

          • by gilgongo ( 57446 )

            iCloud in either case is as secure as any other vendor in the space where the keys are held by the vendor (such as google).

            I thought Google passkeys mean that Google doesn't hold the key? Or is it that not everyone is using passkeys for Google services yet?

    • by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:48AM (#65184923) Journal

      This isn't caving. This is them telling their UK customers that they shouldn't expect privacy in iCloud any more because their government won't allow it.

    • Whew! I cleaned out iCloud and downgraded my account just a couple weeks ago.
  • by DrMrLordX ( 559371 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @10:38AM (#65184745)

    You can't expect encryption of any kind to work if there's a built-in way to compromise it. Insert random hostile foreign state actor will be happy to demonstrate for the audience.

  • by Kelxin ( 3417093 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @10:51AM (#65184773)
    The British royalty need their apple accounts breeched.
    • by dryeo ( 100693 )

      Why? They're not the ones running the country. Better to have the ones running the country having their accounts compromised. They also are more likely to have juicy stuff to find.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Apple could have taken a couple of routes here. This is public, and because Apple is based in the United States, they are likely taking guidance from our intelligence on how to traverse this. My information suggests that Apple does in fact cooperate with United States intelligence on a similar ground, but data access is provided through sophisticated code and hardware routes, essentially 'man in the middle' -- they would not do this or show that capability to foreign countries, for obvious reasons.

    Otherwis

    • There is no one room deep within a ATT CO with a way to break in the middle of TLS transactions anymore, that was out in 2016. If one wants to monitor more than what endpoints are talking, the governments are going to have their own API interface. If the UK and US relationship want to pretend they don't proxy for each other, let them pretend that. Today Id rather have the worlds data in US data center under Trump/Bondi/KASH/Ratcliffe regium instead of UK Labor party ecowarrior breaking open conversat
    • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

      My information suggests that Apple does in fact cooperate with United States intelligence on a similar ground, but data access is provided through sophisticated code and hardware routes, essentially 'man in the middle' .

      I'd like to see a citation.

      There have been several cases in the news where Apple denied access to encrypted iPhones (e.g., https://www.wired.com/story/th... [wired.com] ). I don't know of any documented information that says it has inserted a backdoor, although there is evidence that various intelligence-related third parties have managed to drill in without Apple's help.

    • "This is public, and because Apple is based in the United States, they are likely taking guidance from our intelligence on how to traverse this".

      This is public, and because Apple is based in the United States, they are certainly taking instructions from our intelligence on how to traverse this.

      FTFY.

  • Apple is no longer encrypting iCloud data because of a back door request?

    The UK government shouldn't have one, sure, but it sounds like Apple's solution to "one too many people having a key" is "nobody needs a key". I don't like that my landlord has a key to my apartment, but I don't think the solution is to remove the lock on the doorknob and make the data that much more vulnerable.

    It probably would make more sense for the iCloud screen to have a permanent yellow triangle in the UK, with a banner that says

    • The UK bans companies from telling people there is a request for access, so a banner saying the government is stealing your data would be against the law. . . I think burning the UK’s tech stack to the ground is probably the only move here, which is what is happening.
    • A data residency dropdown on apple software products would make a few caribbean islands and the swiss remarkably good value propositions for data centers. Im choosing either USA or the swiss. Because at least the USA has someone always complaining about every single action of government (at least in the trump era).
    • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

      Apple is no longer encrypting iCloud data because of a back door request?

      The UK government shouldn't have one, sure, but it sounds like Apple's solution to "one too many people having a key" is "nobody needs a key"..

      Encryption where one or more people secretly have a key is not encryption at all. What Apple did was to explicitly call out that the data you might have thought was encrypted isn't. That doesn't mean you can't encrypt your data yourself.

      We have just seen that the "secure" keys to secret government back doors get stolen by bad guys and are used to rifle through files.

      don't like that my landlord has a key to my apartment, but I don't think the solution is to remove the lock on the doorknob and make the data that much more vulnerable.

      In terms of your analogy, it means that you were told "if you want your apartment door to lock, you may install your own lock."

      • by cstacy ( 534252 )

        What Apple did was to explicitly call out that the data you might have thought was encrypted isn't. That doesn't mean you can't encrypt your data yourself.

        Apple users do not have access to their data: (a) It's not in files they can get to, for example to encrypt/decrypt and (b) they do not control when it is uploaded. That's not how iCloud works. It is nothing at all like files on a hard drive; it is not a cloud drive like some other services.

        So, No, they cannot encrypt their files.

        (Well whatever is on the hard drive is automatically encrypted, until you log in, but that has nothing to do with anything on iCloud.)

    • by bsolar ( 1176767 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:49AM (#65184925)

      It probably would make more sense for the iCloud screen to have a permanent yellow triangle in the UK, with a banner that says "warning: data stored here may be accessed by law enforcement at any time without your consent."

      From what I understand the UK requested a backdoor allowing access to encrypted data globally, including to data of users outside the UK. If implemented, that warning would apply to every iCloud user regardless of location.

      It's obviously an unrealistic option for Apple.

    • by FictionPimp ( 712802 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @12:43PM (#65185115) Homepage

      They are no longer offering the ability for you to create your own encryption keys. iCloud is still encrypted with the keys controlled by Apple. AKA Apple can be forced to comply and give up your data.

      "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account. Your iCloud data is encrypted in transit and stored in an encrypted format at rest. The encryption keys from your trusted devices are secured in Apple data centers, so Apple can decrypt your data on your behalf whenever you need it, such as when you sign in on a new device, restore from a backup, or recover your data after you’ve forgotten your password. As long as you can successfully sign in to your Apple Account, you can access your backups, photos, documents, notes, and more."

      What is no longer an option in the UK is Advanced Data Encryption.

      "Starting with iOS 16.2, iPadOS 16.2 and macOS 13.1, you can choose to enable Advanced Data Protection to protect the vast majority of your iCloud data, even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.
      With Advanced Data Protection, the number of data categories that use end-to-end encryption rises to 25 and includes your iCloud Backup, Photos, Notes, and more. The table below lists the additional data categories that are protected by end-to-end encryption when you enable Advanced Data Protection.
      If you enable Advanced Data Protection and then lose access to your account, Apple will not have the encryption keys to help you recover it — you’ll need to use your device passcode or password, a recovery contact, or a personal recovery key. Because the majority of your iCloud data will be protected by end-to-end encryption, you’ll be guided to set up at least one recovery contact or recovery key before you turn on Advanced Data Protection. You must also update all your Apple devices to a software version that supports this feature.
      You can turn off Advanced Data Protection at any time. Your device will securely upload the required encryption keys to Apple servers, and your account will once again use standard data protection."

      Most users never turn on ADE, but for those who do want more privacy and protection from Apple itself being compromised it is a nice option to have.

  • Nelson (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bleedingobvious ( 6265230 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:03AM (#65184803)

    Haha!

    Haha!

    Haha!

    *Any* backdoor is going to eventually become a front door. Technology ignorant farkwits lose again.

    • by Viol8 ( 599362 )

      Sadly being scientifically and technologically ignorant seems to be a job requirement for western politicians who (here in the UK at least) seem to be arts, politics and law graduates with barely even any real world business experience.

    • by CEC-P ( 10248912 )
      There are no doors. The government told them to take them off lol.
  • by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Friday February 21, 2025 @11:06AM (#65184811) Homepage

    So now no one wins. The authorities might think this is a victory but any criminal with a brain will just store their data outside UK jurisdiction and encrypt it themselves. Meanwhile normal users data is slightly less safe (though one would hope the SSL connection from the device to apple during the upload is good enough and random people can't just break into iCloud).

    • Fuckwit criminals will just find a first-year undergrad software student who will set them up with custom encryption software.

      • Fuckwit criminals will just find a first-year undergrad software student who will set them up with custom encryption software.

        Most criminals are dumb. Seriously, watch any of the myriad "true crime" shows on TV to see how dumb the typical criminal is. Smart criminals use burner phones. Smart criminals indeed roll their own encryption. Smart criminals don't use social media, or cloud services.

        Not that I am excusing the UKs excess here, but if they can't continue to catch the dumb criminals they probably won't get many at all.

  • Hey, stupid, clueless British people - stop voting for this shit or you'll end up like Australia, Sweden, and Germany; failed far left shithole states run by big brother assholes.
    • We get no "right to vote for this shit", mate. It's decided for us. We have the right to vote for our politicians, though, and we recently replaced the Tory government with the Labour party but this legislation was designed under the previous government.

    • We are already a failed far left shithole. Unavoidable PC and minority rights left, right and centre.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by letnes ( 10152707 )
      The U.K.’s Investigatory Powers Act 2016. Who was in power then? Here is a quote from a 2017 newspaper article. "A report in The Sun this week quoted a Conservative minister saying that should the government be re-elected, which polls suggest it will, it will move quickly to compel social media firms to hand over decrypted data. The paper quoted an unnamed government minister saying: “The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long”, and suggested that all tech co
      • Designed by the Conservative government but enacted by the current Labour one.
        Ironically, with their slim majority and dissenters within the party, the Conservatives wouldn't have been able to get this stupid law through parliament.
    • Well, come election time Apple could pay for some targeted ads with photos of the responsible minsters, so voters could see the reminders, think bad things, and not vote in ministers making UK or 2nd class citizens without rights. The cost of saturation advertising should be about what they financially lost, complete with scary and ominous music. A little hard in Australia as both sides passed draconian legislation, and even retrospective authorizations. Voting in independent's or new parties, thanks to m
  • to get access to some politician's cloud data and spread it across page 1.
  • It's impossible to make a system secure against the bad guys and insecure for the good guys
    It's also impossible to precisely define who the good guys are
    The choice is binary, security or no security

  • Unless King Charles takes them on like Philip IV took on the Knights Templar I fear the UK is fucked.

  • Since it's become more and more apparent that no tech company is going to be able to withstand the continuing invasion of our digital privacy, what are Slashdotter's recommendations for security?

    WIRED.com posted this on Bluesky today: The WIRED Guide to Protecting Yourself From Government Surveillance [wired.com], and it seems like some sound advice, but it's overly complicated for a non-technical user to implement.

    Any and all suggestions on Apple Ecosystem Security would be greatly appreciated!
    • Privacy on Apple is already compromised with its client-side scanning technology. End-to-end encryption is meaningless because they just scan your content on your device before it gets uploaded to "the cloud." It's actually laughable that the UK government is even targeting end-to-end encryption since that's essentialy a marketing gimmick and not even relevant anymore. Apple can just scan your content in real-time for subversive activity. And since the Apple platform is so locked-down, non-technical users h

  • I wonder how that works for current users then? Are they going to decrypt everything? Or just leave it encrypted but decrypt it on next access?

You can write a small letter to Grandma in the filename. -- Forbes Burkowski, CS, University of Washington

Working...