The UK government's effort to force Apple to introduce a backdoor into its encryption was thwarted when a tribunal denied the request for secret hearings. Activists and reporters uncovered the Home Office's demands, prompting Apple to withdraw the capability for British users. The ruling highlighted the flaws in government arguments that any backdoor could remain secure and that cybersecurity would be flawless. Overall, the debate raises critical questions about privacy, state power, and the implications of secret courts in a democracy.
Secret courts have no place in a democracy. They are officially excused because of cases involving official secrets that would be compromised if produced in open court.
...privacy campaigners and journalists got wind that the UK's Home Office had issued a secret demand that Apple put a back door into its top level none-but-you-and-God iCloud secrecy.
As this case will rest on two impossible things, 1) that any backdoor can be kept secret and 2) that state cybersecurity guarding it will be perfect.
Rather than comply, Apple yanked the capability from British users, an action far more eloquent than a press release.
Collection
[
|
...
]