42
top 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] plz1@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

They should allow a backdoor, but only on UK Parliament members' phones.

[-] goatinspace@feddit.org 5 points 4 weeks ago

Could add cameras in their homes and work, so we can monitor them 24/7 with AI.

[-] Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

I've got a mate who's a delivery driver, his employer has a cab cam watching him all the time. We are employing these MPs, same principle.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

By the way, nobody is forced to become a politician, so yes.

[-] exu@feditown.com 8 points 1 month ago

Only the US is allowed to backdoor every company globally! /s

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

There is no backdoor in Apple’s encryption. That’s the reason the US and UK governments have prosecuted Apple repeatedly. They can obtain iCloud data with a warrant, but are repeatedly pressing for real-time surveillance. The UK banned encryption without a backdoor, so Apple turned off encryption rather than compromising their standard.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

The funny thing is, advanced data protection was optional, and not on by default. Apple just stopped offering it in the UK

https://support.apple.com/en-us/108756

When it’s enabled, they can’t access iCloud data at all, even with a warrant due to the fact it’s E2E with keys they don’t control. That’s what the UK got really mad about. But Apple shut the whole feature down for the UK in response to the backdoor ask.

It’s not different from the UK banning signal because it’s E2E encrypted and they can’t access it.

They’re likely only backing down now because of consumer/media backlash

[-] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 0 points 4 weeks ago

Apple would need to supply the data if they had the encryption key right? So can we assume that even Apple cannot see the encrypted data?

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago

Correct, standard iCloud data is accessible with a warrant. But the UK wanted their own backdoor so they have constant access without a warrant.

But with advanced data protection, Apple can’t provide the data because they don’t have the encryption keys, regardless of a warrant.

Important to note iMessage is always E2E encrypted though, so iMessages cannot be accessed even with a warrant. Advanced data protection just expands that to all iCloud data

[-] Natanael@infosec.pub 1 points 4 weeks ago

Using iMessage with backups does mean the backups are unencrypted and accessible by warrant (unless you use advanced data protection)

[-] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 0 points 4 weeks ago

Okay interesting, thank you for the info.

Who even uses iMessage these days? Pretty sure I turned it off completely because it was messing with the 5 SMS I send in a year ...

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

iMessage is far more common in the US afaik. Whereas most people elsewhere will use WhatsApp or whatever, nobody in my extended family uses anything but iMessage to communicate

[-] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 0 points 4 weeks ago

Ah, yeah right, the US is still stuck in the 00s with that (and payment methods).

But iMessage doesn't work on Android and by default the message will just fail if they have an Android phone and you use iMessage.

[-] tarknassus@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago

Really? Mine defaults to SMS if they don’t receive it as an iMessage message. I can’t recall it ever failing, only a long while back I would get a failure that prompts me to send as SMS - and I’d do it. It’s automatic now.

[-] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 1 points 4 weeks ago

Not sure how long iMessage has existed, but it never properly worked for me on any iPhone, and neither for my partner. I also helped others change the settings to just default to SMS. By default it doesn't show that you need to send a SMS, and it definitely doesn't retry it, at least not in NL.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

There ~~are~~ exist ~~many, many~~ backdoors. Dont be naïve

[-] Squizzy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago
[-] tarknassus@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

“Trust me bro” or “do your own research”.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claims - and as they haven’t backed it up with sources, I’d say it’s bullshit.

[-] szymon@programming.dev -3 points 1 month ago

Snowden, historical documents about CIA, info from Chinese and Russian intelligence

[-] xthexder@l.sw0.com 4 points 4 weeks ago

I didn't think any of that was backdoors. That was the government snooping on unencrypted communications.

[-] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

None of those substantiated the existence of an Apple-made back door.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago

These things you write, they are not in any way substantiation of the claim that Apple doesn't make backdoors.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

That's because it's categorically impossible to prove a negative.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In theory you can learn mind reading from some fantasy universe and check every Apple person. Or ask a crystal ball. Or use some other way to collect full information about our universe, check every rabbit hole, so to say, and then confidently confirm "there's no Apple backdoor here". "Here" meaning this plane of existence.

In practice yes.

EDIT: Forgot - the "refused to cooperate" and "they have disagreements" things even in daily wisdom don't change the probability of Apple having made backdoors. It's PR. You most likely won't learn it from the news if they do, in fact, cooperate.

[-] testfactor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Even in your made up scenario it doesn't prove the negative. Maybe your mind reading didn't work because Apple has a mind wiping device that made them forget. Maybe the crystal ball didn't work because Apple made an even more powerful "crystal ball blocking" device. You can't prove that's not what's really happening.

So no, you in fact can't prove a negative.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

With that additional detail in possibilities it's also not possible to ever fully prove a positive.

My example was with an assumption that you have the full information. Hypothetically.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

I'm not claiming they don't. I'm pointing out the absurdity of calling somebody out for not doing the impossible.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I didn't say "prove", I used another word with bigger allowance. Of "likely backdoors vs likely not" kind. I wanted to say that their "public" conflicts with governments and their statements of the "trust us, we won't sell you" kind are all worth nothing, because being caught lying won't cost them anything.

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago

What WOULD you consider evidence of them not having backdoors, then?

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

Everything FOSS and a good regular security audit

[-] goatinspace@feddit.org 5 points 1 month ago

( ͡° ͜つ ͡°)╭∩╮ UK

[-] obinice@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

Feck you too, I guess. If that's how you want to behave.

I could understand you being unhappy with our government, but just blanket swearing at all 68 million of us is a dick move.

[-] communism@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

Are you the UK? No, you're someone who lives there. The UK is a state.

[-] VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 weeks ago

Dude identifes as a country

[-] Honytawk@feddit.nl 3 points 4 weeks ago

New gender just dropped

[-] ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Let’s not even get into the legitimacy of a state calling itself “The UK of GB and NI” when they’d have a tough time proving NI is entirely onboard

[-] crapwittyname@feddit.uk 0 points 1 month ago

A lot of GB isn't either, to be fair.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 4 weeks ago

It should be renamed to, London plus all surrounding bits of land that we don't care about. It's a bit of a mouthful but it would be a more accurate name

[-] NotJohnSmith@feddit.uk 1 points 4 weeks ago

I could be wrong but I don't think s/he was being serious

[-] PushButton@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

UK is becoming a shit show very fast, this right after OSA.

It's maybe the time to block the UK from the internet and leave them "be safe" alone.

[-] realitista@lemmus.org 3 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

UK keeps forgetting that it's just a little country now. It can't play the big boy games like the EU and US any more.

[-] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 weeks ago

You basically summed up the UK in a sentence. People here genuinely think we either are, or should be a world power like America.

[-] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 weeks ago

The "big boys" were all pussies over sending western tanks and long range missiles to Ukraine, the UK was the first. There are very few things we can be proud of these days. But that is one of them.

[-] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 3 points 4 weeks ago

The whole having a backdoor to encryption is bullshit, that defeats the entire point.

I do understand that they want some kind of control on things like encryption, since criminals/terrorist/etc can abuse it as well. Keeping society safe is kinda important, and some level of transparency is used for that. This like deposited annual reports for example will help find companies/people funding terrorism.

But we should never completely compromise the privacy of individuals

[-] Dicska@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

They want a backdoor to your emails while terrorism has been clear as day and they still haven't done anything about it in Gaza.

[-] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 weeks ago

Ask them for a backdoor to their wives for "national security"

this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
42 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

74251 readers
826 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS