Apple Launches Legal Challenge To UK 'Back Door' Order (ft.com) 15
Apple is stepping up its fight with the British government over a demand to create a "back door" in its most secure cloud storage systems, by filing a legal complaint that it hopes will overturn the order. Financial Times: The iPhone maker has made its appeal to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, an independent judicial body that examines complaints against the UK security services, according to people familiar with the matter. The Silicon Valley company's legal challenge is believed to be the first time that provisions in the 2016 Investigatory Powers Act allowing UK authorities to break encryption have been tested before the court.
The Investigatory Powers Tribunal will consider whether the UK's notice to Apple was lawful and, if not, could order it to be quashed. The case could be heard as soon as this month, although it is unclear whether there will be any public disclosure of the hearing. The government is likely to argue the case should be restricted on national security grounds. Apple received a "technical capability notice" under the act in January.
The Investigatory Powers Tribunal will consider whether the UK's notice to Apple was lawful and, if not, could order it to be quashed. The case could be heard as soon as this month, although it is unclear whether there will be any public disclosure of the hearing. The government is likely to argue the case should be restricted on national security grounds. Apple received a "technical capability notice" under the act in January.
Good (Score:1)
Maybe my pizza will get here on time.
Does Not Matter (Score:2)
The Courts are generally broken once the high price lawyers show up.
The problem is, the law is often contradictory, so that the judges can rule in either direction
Politicians are clueless about tech (Score:5, Insightful)
There are only two choices, security or no security
It's impossible to make a system secure against the bad guys while being insecure for the good guys. The bad guys are clever and will find a workaround. Also, it's impossible to precisely define who the good guys are or to guarantee that they will always act in a good manner
Re: (Score:3)
good guys
Never mind the good guys. I want in to the accounts of the bad girls.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, you say that like there's good girls anywhere anymore.
Re: Politicians are clueless about tech (Score:3)
https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754
Re: Politicians are clueless about tech (Score:2)
Apple donâ(TM)t offer end to end encryption with the Chinese iCloud. They also allow non-Chinese citizens in China to use the regular iCloud
Re: (Score:2)
Those that wish to control the world, don't understand Nature, which is why they want to control the world. Their efforts to control the world ending in failure over and over is what this universe is for. This is how things are.
Apple needs a UK egress plan or a poison pill (Score:2)
The poison pill would involve turning off all Apple accounts of UK government people and a week later their families if they don't back off.
They are going to lose (Score:2)
don't tell me what I must do for you (Score:3)
Law enforcement wants to make their jobs easier and more effective. Citizens want privacy. So it comes down to just how much privacy do you sacrifice to make the law's job easier. There aren't any hard rules other than to say "all or nothing", so it's going to come down to opinion as to where to draw the line, and that'll always be an argument.
I personally don't think law needs a back door everywhere, which is what they'd LIKE to have. Here in the USA anyway, we have things like the 4th Amendment, part of the "bill of rights", which basically lays down rules as to how invasive the government can be. Without hard stops like that, things are just going to keep creeping forward year after year until we all have police cameras in our house "for our protection". Today that seems absurd, but what will it look like in 10 years? Or in 50 years? Old timers, look back at how life used to be, how "free" you used to be. Take a moment to reflect on all the rights you've lost over the years.
Rights usually don't get "taken away" all at once because the public wouldn't allow it. Instead, they get eroded slowly over time, to "ease" the people into a place that they'd never have accepted going to in one step. And I see this as just another step they want to make to take another bite out of the people's rights.
Probably the biggest issue I have with this is how fundamentally different it is from what's happened in the past. Laws are usually passed to restrict what we're allowed to do. But this law is very different - it's not telling anyone what they can't do, it's FORCING Apple to DO something for them. (Writ of Assistance, remember that one? remember how much we HATED it? Or how about Quartering Act?) And I think that crosses a line - a very clear, easy to see, easy to sharply define line. And that's where the best laws are positioned.
Draw the line here. Right here. Nice and clean. Tell me what I can't do, but DO NOT tell me what I have to do for you.
Re: (Score:2)
You trust the US government more than I think is reasonable. Yes, it's there in the constitution. But when they want to they either find a way around it, or ignore it. (Look as history!)
Usual "national security" bullshit (Score:1)
> The case could be heard as soon as this month, although it is unclear whether there will be any public disclosure of the hearing. The government is likely to argue the case should be restricted on national security grounds.
Except that this is something that would affect all iPhone customers on the planet, not just those in UK, so Apple can go ahead and disclose everything, not only because of 4th Amendment in US, but also to point out the hypocrisy of wanting to keep details of a case about removing pr