Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
Apple has attacked what it calls the UK's "unprecedented overreach" in proposing that it have the power of veto over all Big Tech security features across the globe.
The UK's House of Lords is due to debate an update to the country's Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) 2016 on January 30, 2024. In a much earlier form in 2015, the IPA was slammed by Apple for how it then proposed breaking encryption.
According to BBC News, Apple is now attacking the latest update proposals. Apple is against the UK having a veto over security updates, and also over how if the country were to exercise that veto, no Big Tech firm could even say that it has.
[...] Separately, in September 2023, the UK backed down from a nonsensical law after firms including Apple and WhatsApp said they would cease operating in the UK if the government passed a law requiring the breaking of end-to-end encryption.
The issue of Apple and others not being legally allowed to reveal that a government had vetoed a security update is similar to how the US forbade the company from revealing push notification surveillance.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @07:57AM (22 children)
Hi UK goofballs, security researcher here. You know, one of those people who usually find these things that companies fix in their patches. So the company cannot reveal that they must not patch it, huh?
I can. Because I don't give a flying fuck about your laws. I can tell the world that their crap remains insecure and hackable because of you.
Oh, that might be a diplomatic problem and could give the UK a black eye in the eyes of the world? I fucking hope so!
(Score: 4, Funny) by turgid on Thursday February 01 2024, @08:20AM (3 children)
We have particularly stupid politicians here in the UK. Every day is a facepalm day [theguardian.com] in UK government.
I should have emigrated. I really regret staying here.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 4, Interesting) by janrinok on Thursday February 01 2024, @08:47AM (1 child)
I did, but long before Brexit. I do not have any regrets.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Thursday February 01 2024, @10:15PM
I did too, but I got caught by Brexit (had to change my plans and made things a lot more difficult and expensive). I don't have any regrets either.
Went back to the UK recently on a work trip and it re-affirmed my choice despite the difficulties and sacrifices of relocating.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:41PM
Don't feel singled out.
Those that can, do. Those that can't teach. And those that are even too stupid to do that make laws about it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Thursday February 01 2024, @11:14AM (10 children)
One might note that UK is part of 5 Eyes. A conspiracy nut might suggest that the "powers that be" have picked on an appropriate nation where they think the law might be passed that can be applied for all TLAs in the 5 Eyes.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Thursday February 01 2024, @11:29AM (7 children)
Oh, and ps: UK has extradition treaties with many other nations, if said nations are complicit then they may be happy to extradite.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:30PM (6 children)
Last I checked I'm not breaking a local law by spilling those beans.
Technically, I wouldn't even break a UK law. I'm not the company that is responsible for fixing it after all.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Freeman on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:51PM (5 children)
I have two names for you: Edward Snowden and Julian Assange (Okay, I tacked on Kim Dotcom too.)
Okay, the Edward Snowden thing is a fair bit different, but he had similar problems to Julian Assange.
Just because you've never visited a place (Julian Assange/Kim Dotcom) doesn't mean you can't be extradited.
https://www.reuters.com/world/julian-assanges-final-appeal-against-us-extradition-be-held-february-2023-12-19/ [reuters.com] (The screwed one, even if he eventually isn't extradited.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden [wikipedia.org] (The one that got away)
https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/17/23764438/kim-dotcom-megaupload-executives-sentenced-to-over-two-years-new-zealand-doj [theverge.com] (Status To Be Determined)
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @03:03PM (4 children)
Well, if you play that game, you can't really expect to be very well liked by various state actors.
Snowden is a pretty tragic case. He just did what any person with a conscience would have done and ended up as a pawn in a political game. I really feel for him because I know I would probably have done the same. Assange, well, he's a bit of a narcissist and showman, with him I just don't know whether he did it because he thought it's the right thing, for the lulz or because he wanted to show off.
And Kimmie... that lardball will hopefully end up as a shitstain on a prison wall. If you run down his history, you can't help but think that Karma is a bitch and at least sometimes it hits the right bastard.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Freeman on Thursday February 01 2024, @03:24PM (3 children)
Neither Julian Assange or Kim Dotcom violated the laws of the country they were living in, thus the extradition hearings. Otherwise, they would have been serving time for the laws they did break. While neither of them are saints, the long arm of the law is being stretched a bit much in both cases.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1, Troll) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @03:28PM (2 children)
Assange was accused in Sweden of rape. Whether it was a set-up or not, who am I to decide that? One part of me would say of course the US would set him up like that, the other part of me would say that he's enough of an egomaniac to think that every woman wants him... I frankly can't be assed to care. In the end, the whole deal is a huge political poker where of course the US won't back down because they feel slighted. And, let's be honest, they got what they wanted, nobody gives a fuck about Wikileaks anymore.
When it comes to Kimmie-boy... Frankly? At this point, I don't even care if he broke a particular law or whether he's framed, this guy is such a pest and generally unlikable bastard that if someone put a bullet through his head, all I would do is step over the corpse and ignore it.
At best I would say "finally".
(Score: 3, Touché) by Freeman on Thursday February 01 2024, @04:54PM
Assange never had a chance at a fair trial and likely would have been extradited the USA. He may still be extradited. Regarding the rape accusations and other things. Assuming everything is exactly as the alleged victim said, he was definitely not in the right. That said at best it was a case of he said/she said and there was quite a bit of consensual sex going on between them.
Kim Dotcom's character has nothing to do with the legality of what was done.
Laws exist as much to protect the individual from government overreach as it does to protect the Nation. The Nation should be the people, the government shouldn't be protected from it's own people. A government should fear it's people, because the people should hold the power.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2024, @09:02PM
Assange was never accused of rape by the woman in question. When she found out he was also bonking her friend she went to a police station and asked if he could be forced to take a STI test.
A CIA asset leveraged that into an accusation to try and get Assange into custody. He was questioned and it was so obviously bullshit that the real cops and prosecutor released him before the asset could arrange to get him shunted off to the US.
(Score: 4, Funny) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 01 2024, @11:56AM (1 child)
On the other hand, now that they are no longer part of the EU market, companies could afford to just pull their products from the UK and then they could just ignore those laws entirely.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Freeman on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:54PM
Some companies could, others would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. The UK is still a major market by itself.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 5, Interesting) by janrinok on Thursday February 01 2024, @12:02PM (6 children)
I think that you are looking at this incorrectly, but you make a good and valid point.
This is part of a long-term problem many other countries have with US companies thinking that they can ignore laws anywhere in the world. . It would be a stupid thing to do, but the UK is quite entitled to say 'you cannot do X here'. It is a sovereign state and can pass whatever laws it wishes to pass. Apple is only one company out of 14 that have been asked to provide comments in several areas including privacy and protection of users' data among other things. Apple are simply taking a leaf out of Microsoft's book and spreading FUD. They don't want to lose a chunk of the business by having their phones and other offerings non-compliant with UK law (again - remember the charger problem and special connectors of a year or two back?) Apple also want to get other companies to join them in objecting and additionally create an opposition among UK citizens. So they have made exaggerated claims and are hoping that it will work. It might well do.
Yes it would be stupid to outlaw end-to-end encryption - but that doesn't mean that the UK cannot do it. They can enforce gag orders too, but only in the UK. But that would hurt Apple's business again. My guess is that common-sense will prevail and the proposed bill will be watered down. Nevertheless, US companies will have to get used to not being able to do what they want in every country. Apple could simply say 'No - we will no longer support or sell our products in the UK' but they are not doing that. They are really thinking of business and not the privacy of communications.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by pTamok on Thursday February 01 2024, @12:46PM (3 children)
Yes.
Multinational companies (and other multi-national/transnational organisations) are finding out that the Internet has borders. Who knew?
In the past, the borders were minimal, or not enforced at all. But every fibre-optic cable, copper (including co-ax) and radio signal that crosses a jurisdictional boundary becomes subject to the laws of both jurisdictions. The surprise is that the laws and other regulations do not need to be the same, consistent, or even sane.
Politicians also have an annoying habit of (a) being replaced and (b) even if not replaced, not staying 'bought-in' to whatever your organisation finds most amenable. So 'comfortable' jurisdictions can change.
In the USA, people are finding out that state boundaries have meaning on the Internet - age verification and abortion being two of the most salient examples; and the same works in spades across international boundaries. The 'extra-territoriality' of US legal jurisdiction is not 100%, which comes as a surprise to some.
It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:36PM (2 children)
Borders have no meaning on the internet. Anything you could do to stuff the cat back into the bag will have fallout worse than what you want to deal with.
You outlaw my porn site? I move abroad. You outlaw people accessing my porn site? I don't care. You bully the country I sit in into compliance? There will be token compliance and a dog-and-pony show of "restrictions" that are easily circumvented. You block access to my site on your end? I'll make your constituents aware of your censorship and let them deal with you.
Your laws mean jack shit on the internet. Unless it is something that can somehow be globally established because you can actually find global consensus for it (good luck with 99% of what you'd like to vanish), you're SOL.
(Score: 4, Touché) by hendrikboom on Thursday February 01 2024, @06:23PM
They mean more than jack shit. They mean that you may be forced to perform all those circumventions you listed.
(Score: 4, Informative) by jasassin on Friday February 02 2024, @01:24AM
Tell that to Sen. John Thune (R. South Dakota) after he the started the internet commerce state tax legislation that passed into law many years ago (yes kids you used to be able to buy things off amazon or ebay and not pay sales tax).
So I'm pretty sure borders have meaning on the internet, or maybe I'm hallucinating the sales tax when I purchase things on the internet.
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 5, Insightful) by turgid on Thursday February 01 2024, @12:47PM (1 child)
If they make end to end encryption illegal, all commerce will stop apart from anything involving physical cash transactions. They really don't have a clue.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0, Troll) by Opportunist on Thursday February 01 2024, @02:39PM
Oh, that's not encryption. That's just a protocol you don't know.
Also, this isn't encrypted communication. This is just a couple cat pics with some insignificant data errors in them.
(Score: 3, Touché) by jasassin on Friday February 02 2024, @01:10AM
They want to know everything everyone is saying and everything they are doing. I get it.
They are trying to pass laws to get access to 0-day exploits (even a blind man can see this is what the whole thing is about), and they're saying it's for security.
Hey, I live in the U.S.A. and I'm proud of it. I don't want you U.K. weird, creepy, bastards snooping my phone. Who the hell do you think you are?
Go fix your teeth and fuck off!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A