How much do you charge a month for that service? How do I access my photos?
RIPA Request to Apple by UK
- Thread starter Richie
- Start date
How much do you charge a month for that service? How do I access my photos?
Because people want to take measure to protect their data from the "criminally intended" you referred to earlier, and what measures they wish to take will differ depending on their appetite for risk and the kind of data they are storing; it's very naïve to assume people are only using it for "family snapshots".
Seems like a great idea until you have a house fire/flood/they get stolen/etc.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 3,309
- Location
- The South
Except they have done and still do; it isn't as strict as you think it would or should be unfortunately.
As i mentioned in the Apple thread, given the amount of Apple devices and services used throughout government, it would have caused this government a monumental headache if Apple did decide to call their bluff.
This isn't client-side scanning similar to what Apple were proposing but rather localised "AI" detection of spam, malware, nudity for messaging protection (similar to what Apple does with iMessage). Researchers and devs have said it isn't (currently) sending data server-side.
I agree it shouldn't have been forced on users but it isn't, at this time, the big bad wolf a lot of folk are saying it is. Plus, you can uninstall it if you wish.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 3,309
- Location
- The South
Privacy. It's the same reason why you don't allow the government to stick up cameras in your house and in your bedrooms.
… and those ministers should be fired for breaching the ministerial code and many have been fired for doing just that (for 5 minutes anyway). They seem to have largely got a grip on that more recently mind.
The government could just switch to using Android based phones because…. it’s just a phone.
The government isn’t using iCloud or any of Apple’s services because they are terrible for corporate use.
They’ll be fully in bed with Microsoft like pretty much every single large corporation organisation is in the west that needs to get work done because there is no alternative.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 3,309
- Location
- The South
I agree but it's still happening; common-sense isn't exactly rife with gov. employees, especially when it comes to tech.
It's a mixture of platforms but there's a lot of personal iPhones, and other Apple devices, being used amongst employees and if the government and Apple having a peeing match meant Jonathan sitting in strangers couldn't send some photo or text, then someone will be told about it.
I feel given how ingrained Apple is, the backlash from them calling the governments bluff would have caused the gov to halt, even if it was temporary.
Tomorrow we ride to Hagar's house to rifle through all his
These laws always sound good on paper, but like Eddie99 said I imagine the super serious criminals are likely going to be encrypting their data with things like VeraCrypt and not uploading them to the cloud but we end up with a law that lets someone search your data for the most banal reason. It's the same as when Governments call to censor the internet to protect kids; again this sounds great in principal but it's usually just a way to block whatever they like using kids as a scapegoat.
All my documents/photos are backed up in OneDrive (not encrypted). I trust someone at Microsoft isn't just going to randomly thumb through everything as I'm not important enough but still I'd rather have the option that they definitely couldn't.
That’s a you problem. I don’t want any Tom, Dick and Harry flipping through my pics just for the hell of it. You wouldn’t like it if some random walked into your house and started looking at your family photo albums. Principle is the same
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,128
Yeah microsoft would never do anything like that and call it Recall... oh wait
Which they rightly got publiclybcriticised for and then reversed the decision (at least for now).
There’s a difference between a company spying on you and a government secretly forcing a company to spy on you
That isn’t what is happening though so it’s a silly straw man.
I’m all for criticising Apple and the government where there is genuine criticism due, but let’s stop making things up please.
You’d also be naive to think notices have not been issued to Google, Microsoft and others who offer similar services and operate in the U.K.
I’m all for criticising Apple and the government where there is genuine criticism due, but let’s stop making things up please.
You’d also be naive to think notices have not been issued to Google, Microsoft and others who offer similar services and operate in the U.K.
The FBI is doing the same thing as the UK.
www.forbes.com
FBI Warns iPhone, Android Users—We Want ‘Lawful Access’ To All Your Encrypted Data
UK forces Apple to provide encrypted data to security agencies—is America next?
www.forbes.com
Yes that is what is happening. The current process would be this:
1. Police or government want to see your data.
2. They get a warrant from a judge.
3. They send warrant to Apple/Google/whoever.
4. Apple/etc say they can't provide the data because it's encrypted.
5. Police demand the encryption key from the user which you are compelled to provide under part 3 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
6. At this point in time you are aware of the investigation. It doesn't stop the investigation but you are aware of it.
The new process would be this:
1. Police or government want to see your data.
2. They get a warrant from a judge.
3. They send warrant to Apple/Google/whoever.
4. Apple/etc provide the data.
5. You have no idea this happened and the police/government can continue spying on you via Apple/etc you without you knowing.
Last edited:
Edit: the post I responded to claimed:
In neither scenario is Apple being forced to spy on you by the government or otherwise. So yes, it is a silly strawman.
If the government is able to get a warrant, they are not spying on you, you’ll be under investigation for a relevant crime, it’s also a snapshot, it’s not on going access. The latter would be surveillance and is covered by different laws.
Also on your first timeline above, it’s not even correct. Apple (and no doubt others) can and always have handed over the encrypted data, they just can’t decrypt it for the police if they don’t have the key.
I’d be surprised if the end user was not away they are under investigation in nearly all cases. The police tend to investigate crime after the event. They are not going to be able to get a warrant for your data from Apple on a speculative basis, they will need actual grounds for the warrant.
Last edited:
Hi! My name is Bluecube! Hades is the chap providing coherent arguments not me!