from the a-small-bit-of-good-news dept
The UK government has reportedly backed down from its dangerous demand that Apple build encryption backdoors, following pressure from the Trump administration. But the secretive nature of this “mutually beneficial” agreement should make us deeply suspicious about what was actually traded away.
The UK government has backed down on a controversial demand for Apple to build a “back door” into its technology to access private user data following pressure from the Trump administration.
We had written about this—and how dangerous it was—the day the news leaked that the UK had issued such an order. In response, Apple turned off its iCloud encryption in the UK, making everyone way less safe.
Of course, I say “leaked” because the demands to Apple were never officially discussed by the UK government, who hoped to keep this unconscionable attack on everyone’s privacy a total secret. Since then, Apple has been fighting it out (still in secret) in the UK to try to get this order blocked, though it was believed that they only had limited legal routes to stopping it.
But there was widespread condemnation about this move by the UK government, and this is one of those cases where that includes from the Trump administration, who is taking credit for convincing the UK to back down. Of course, the UK is making no comment whatsoever, and the secret nature of the deal—which includes a source saying that the agreement was “mutually beneficial—to the US and the UK should raise some questions:
Gabbard said that over the “past few months,” she had been “working closely with our partners in the UK,” alongside President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, on the agreement.
A source familiar with the discussions told CNN that Gabbard spoke with her counterpart in the UK, Deputy National Security Advisory Matt Collins, a few times about the issue, including once when the UK delegation visited the White House. Vance was also personally involved in reaching a deal, engaging in direct conversations with British government officials to come to what was considered a “mutually beneficial” agreement for both countries, a White House official told CNN.
“This agreement between our two governments maintains each country’s sovereignty while ensuring close cooperation on data,” a White House official said.
Reading between the lines here, it sounds like the US may have threatened to cut off access to some of the intelligence data it collects if the UK went through with the plan.
Of course, it would be more reassuring if the US government itself wasn’t still trying to push through its own attacks on encryption. Federal law enforcement officials, federal elected officials, and state legislators are still pushing efforts to undermine encryption in the US.
So, yes, I’m glad that Gabbard and Vance were able to pressure the UK to drop this completely brain-dead and dangerous idea, but it would be nice if they got their allies in the US government to step down on this issue as well. And, also if they came clear as to what the deal with the UK is regarding “close cooperation on data.”
The broader lesson here is that we should be happy that the UK is backing down, but we shouldn’t celebrate too quickly when governments make these kinds of secretive deals around fundamental rights. Yes, it’s good that the UK backed down from its most aggressive position. But until we know what was traded in return, and until both countries abandon their broader anti-encryption agendas, it’s still unclear if this is a real victory for digital rights or more like a tactical retreat in a much longer war against privacy.
Filed Under: backdoors, encryption, investigatory powers act, jd vance, surveillance, tulsi gabbard, uk
Companies: apple
