"Apple has resisted similar attempts to pre-install government-mandated apps in the past, so is likely to do so again. That's because the company understands that once you permit one government to install apps on devices, every government will do the same - and since these apps aren't necessarily designed within Apple's own privacy and security guidelines, they might be unsafe. This raises the specter of state surveillance being just one app install away."
"It is worth notingthat while Apple will resist government attempts to chip away at the privacy and security of its platforms, the company remains subject to the law. That is why it may already have created a backdoor vulnerability in the iPhone to meet demands made by the rogue UK government, and it's why in China it ensures iCloud data is stored on locally-based servers."
"Ultimately, and perhaps, sadly, if people want to oppose creeping state surveillance, they have to be willing to oppose it themselves in the political sphere, rather than relying on private companies to fight on their behalf. Apple, like anyone else, must act within the law, even when the law is foolish, dangerous, or misconstrued."
Apple has resisted government attempts to pre-install mandated apps to protect privacy and security. Allowing one government to install apps would invite every government to do the same and introduce apps that may not meet platform security and privacy standards. This creates a tangible risk that state surveillance could be enabled by a single app install. The demand effectively removes user consent as a meaningful choice. Apple remains subject to law and may have created an iPhone backdoor for UK demands and stores Chinese iCloud data on local servers. Opposition to creeping state surveillance requires political action rather than reliance on private companies.
Read at Computerworld
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]