A government that demands invisibility in court is one step away from disappearing accountability altogether.
CAM WAKEFIELD
With a necessary reality check, a UK tribunal has told the government that, no, it cannot hold a secret legal battle against Apple over encryption. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), the body meant to oversee the country’s surveillance powers, has dismissed efforts by the Home Office to keep the entire case hidden from public view. And in doing so, it has delivered a quietly important win for press freedom and digital rights. Although, things are far from over.
The case revolves around Apple’s Advanced Data Protection system, or ADP. It’s a security feature that gives users the option to encrypt their iCloud data in a way that even Apple itself cannot access. Not through a backdoor, not with a master key, not at all. It’s the kind of robust end-to-end encryption that governments around the world have grown increasingly nervous about.
The UK, it turns out, is no exception.
The Home Office had tried to argue that even disclosing the existence of the case could jeopardize national security. But the tribunal wasn’t persuaded. In its published ruling, it said: “It would have been a truly extraordinary step to conduct a hearing entirely in secret without any public revelation of the fact that a hearing was taking place.”
The government’s request challenged press freedom, veering into the territory of democracy-by-blindfold. The tribunal concluded that sharing “the bare details of the case” would not, in fact, bring down the roof on national security.
We obtained a copy of the judgement for you here.
So now, the legal battle moves into the public eye, where it belongs, and where the dangerous surveillance law can be challenged.
Apple’s stance has been consistent. The company says it has no technical means to access ADP-protected data, and it does not intend to build one. The rationale is simple: once you create a vulnerability in encryption, you’ve weakened the system for everyone. Law enforcement may be the intended user, but malicious actors don’t tend to respect boundaries.
Earlier this year, Apple pulled ADP from UK devices entirely, after pressure from the government. It then filed a legal challenge in March, drawing a firm line in the sand over what it’s willing to compromise.
The Home Office, for its part, insists that it isn’t trying to snoop on the public. It reiterated that any attempt to access encrypted material requires a warrant, signed off by a court. “There are longstanding and targeted investigatory powers that allow the authorities to investigate terrorists, pedophiles, and the most serious criminals and they are subject to robust safeguards including judicial authorizations and oversight to protect people’s privacy,” it said.
That’s all fine in principle. However, the government’s attempt to keep this particular legal process secret has made its definition of “robust safeguards” look worryingly vague. Transparency, it turns out, is not optional when it comes to decisions that affect the rights of millions of people.
The implications of this case don’t stop at the UK’s borders. As governments around the world weigh stronger surveillance powers in the name of public safety, Apple’s refusal, and the tribunal’s decision to force the case into the open, set a precedent.
Weakening encryption isn’t simply a matter of local law enforcement convenience. It’s a global issue that affects anyone who relies on secure communication.
The IPT has also confirmed it will hear the case brought by Privacy International, Liberty, and two individuals who are challenging the legality of the Home Secretary’s decision to use her powers to secretly compel Apple to compromise its own security systems.
This article (UK Tribunal Blocks Government’s Attempt to Keep Apple Surveillance Case Secret) was created and published by Reclaim the Net and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Cam Wakefield
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply