Activist Groups Challenge UK Demand for Apple Encryption Backdoor - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Activist Groups Challenge UK Demand for Apple Encryption Backdoor

Two human rights groups have filed a legal complaint with the UK's Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) in an attempt to quash the UK government's demand for Apple to allow backdoor access to its encrypted data (via Financial Times).

iCloud Versus UK Key Feature
Earlier this year, the UK government invoked the Investigatory Powers Act to demand that Apple create a backdoor granting secret access to encrypted user data stored in iCloud globally. However, Apple refused to comply.

In response, rather than granting the requested access, Apple withdrew Advanced Data Protection from the UK, ensuring it would not be required to provide decryption capabilities. Advanced Data Protection offers end-to-end encryption for iPhone, iPad, and Mac users' data stored in iCloud.

Apple subsequently lodged a legal complaint to the IPT. "We have never built a back door or master key to any of our products, and we never will," Apple said at the time.

Now Privacy International and Liberty have done the same. The groups argue that Apple's appeal should be heard in public, and that ordering Apple to compromise the security of its products breaches its customers' free expression and privacy rights.

"The UK's use of a secret order to undermine security for people worldwide is unacceptable and disproportionate," said Caroline Wilson Palow, legal director at Privacy International. "People the world over rely on end-to-end encryption to protect themselves from harassment and oppression. No country should have the power to undermine that protection for everyone."

"It would be an entirely reckless and unprecedented move from the UK government to open up a back door to this data, and one that will have global consequences," said Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director. "We need concrete guarantees from the UK government that they won’t proceed with these plans."

The matter is being considered at a closed hearing of the tribunal at the High Court on Friday. Apple is not able to discuss the order made by the UK in public due to the terms of the law.

Several UK media organizations, including the BBC, Reuters, Sky News and the publishers of The Guardian, The Times, The Telegraph, Computer Weekly and Financial Times, have also made a submission to the IPT arguing that the Apple case should not be heard in private.

The US government is also looking into whether the UK's demand has violated the CLOUD act, which keeps the UK from asking for data from US citizens, and vice versa.

In a February interview with The Spectator, US president Donald Trump said he confronted UK prime minister Keir Starmer over the move and compared it with Chinese government surveillance.

"We told them you can't do this," Trump said. "We actually told [Starmer]... that's incredible. That's something, you know, that you hear about with China."

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

kidsoniphonedigitalwellnesspetition

UK to Ban Social Media for Under-16s Starting in 2027

Monday June 15, 2026 2:09 am PDT by
The British government will introduce a ban on social media access for all users under 16 years of age, set to take effect in 2027. UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced the plans on Monday, calling the move "the right step for Britain" and the best way to keep children safe online. "This is not something I do lightly, and I will not present it as cost-free, as if social media has [brought ...
iCloud General Feature Redux

UK iCloud Users Could Claim £77 Each as Apple Case Heads to Trial

Tuesday June 23, 2026 1:49 am PDT by
A class action lawsuit accusing Apple of overcharging U.K. iCloud users has been certified to go ahead, putting the £3 billion ($3.9 billion) claim on track for a trial in October 2028. According to BBC News, the Competition Appeal Tribunal cleared consumer group Which? to bring the case on behalf of an estimated 40 million U.K. iPhone and iPad owners, each of whom could receive up to £77...
app store blue banner uk fixed

UK Pushes Apple to Loosen App Store Payment and NFC Rules

Tuesday June 30, 2026 3:00 am PDT by
The U.K.'s competition regulator has proposed letting app developers direct users to payment options outside Apple's App Store and Google's Play Store, in a move aimed at increasing competition and reducing the fees charged by the two companies. As reported by Reuters, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said the proposals would remove restrictions that currently prevent U.K....

Top Rated Comments

Dr McKay Avatar
17 months ago

I would be happy for *anything* I say privately to be made public. I never post anonymously and stand by what I say. A lot of the dissent comes from Americans who conflate being thoroughly nasty to others as ‘free speech’ and who have this strange adversarial relationship with their authorities. I can say what I like about the government, the King, whoever, without fear of retribution. It’s only when I cross the line and what I say can be construed as hate speech, or something worse there is a problem. It bothers me greatly as to what people are saying that they feel needs hiding from the security services. In a dictatorship the authorities would have access to your material anyway. Don’t mete out tired clichés about those of us who have nothing to hide as somehow anti-democratic. It doesn’t wash. It’s about responsibility and respect of others.
If you don’t care about privacy then that’s your choice, don’t push your opinions of what level of privacy is acceptable onto others. Your insinuations about people who do want privacy are frankly insulting, a right to a private life is a human right, if it can be revoked on a whim then it’s a privilege, not a right. Wanting privacy does not mean I have things to hide. Nowhere did I “mete out tired cliches” about people having nothing to hide, nowhere did I claim it was anti-democratic. I don’t even know how to address your unrelated tangent about Americans.

Please do try to stay on topic and refrain from making arguments up to attack.
Score: 32 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Dr McKay Avatar
17 months ago

I am wondering how many of these people actually had ADP enabled in the first place? I don’t know anybody who had enabled it or even know what it was. I suspect that’s the case for 99% of iOS or macOS users. It’s a lot of hot air IMO.
I had it enabled but only because I saw an article on MacRumors about it releasing, probably wouldn’t have known about it otherwise. I disagree with your take on it though, it’s fine to not use something but also not want the ability to have it taken away from you. I use my freedom of speech pretty seldomly (I occasionally protest against a government bill I deem unfair), some people never use it, they’re still entitled to feel upset if the government tried to remove it.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
JonathanParker Avatar
17 months ago
Something rotten in London
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
JonathanParker Avatar
17 months ago

Let's hope the apoplectic tech-heads spontaneously implode because only they and the criminals give a toss about the issue.
Even Wikipedia ('https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument') says that your “Nothing to hide” attitude is a logical fallacy.



Attachment Image
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Shirasaki Avatar
17 months ago

I am wondering how many of these people actually had ADP enabled in the first place? I don’t know anybody who had enabled it or even knew what it was. I suspect that’s the case for 99% of iOS or macOS users. It’s a lot of hot air IMO.
Even though most people don’t enable ADP, doesn’t mean disabling ADP is acceptable. It takes away choices for people who need enhanced data security, protects privacy and so on. Now, you may want to argue “what about kids”. Well, based on that logic, 99% of stuff adults used to would need to be banned “to protect kids”. Things like alcohol, cigarettes, most books, TV programs etc.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Shirasaki Avatar
17 months ago
My gut feeling tells me that despite those people’s best efforts, UK will prevail and start a new era of surveillance similar to the scale and depth of what China is doing right now. Many more advanced cameras will be installed nationwide, and privacy will likely become a thing of the past. Worse, arrests for “what if” crime could start to creep in. UK has fallen a very long way. Is there even anything left to reverse the course at this point?
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)