Why Apple is taking on Home Office’s new-look surveillance bill
Apple has launched a blistering attack on government proposals that would force tech firms to clear new privacy features with the Home Office.
The iPhone maker said the changes to the Investigatory Powers Act, which are under consultation, would pose a “serious and direct threat” to the security of user data.
In a nine-page submission, Apple said it would rather withdraw critical privacy measures in its services from the UK than adhere to the plans.
But what exactly does this law do, what’s being proposed now, and is Apple right to be so opposed to it?
‘Snooper’s charter’
The Investigatory Powers Act came into law in 2016, and was labelled a “snooper’s charter” by critics.
It included allowing security agencies and police to intercept suspicious communications, and permitting the Home Office to compel communications providers to remove encryption from communications or data.
Encryption is what protects messages from being seen by people outside the conversation. It’s used in popular messaging apps like WhatsApp and Signal.
Advocates say it protects users from surveillance, theft, and fraud; while critics say it helps criminals thrive.
The government argued the bill would keep the UK safe from hostile threats and crack down on illegal activity.
A statement this week said the amendments will help keep the law relevant as technology develops and “protect the public from criminals, child sex abusers and terrorists”.
Read more:
WhatsApp adds locked chats for ‘intimate conversations’
WhatsApp is among the platforms that offers end-to-end encryption
What are the amendments?
Apple, which opposed the original bill, is particularly unhappy about three proposed changes.
One would force companies to tell the Home Office in advance of new security features they want to add. Those it doesn’t approve of would need to be disabled immediately.
Another would see expanded authority for the Home Office to force non-UK companies to comply with changes it wants them to make to security features.
Apple says this would give the UK an “authority that no other country has” and stifle innovation.
The Home Office insists the act includes “strong independent oversight” to regulate how the surveillance powers it gives public authorities are used. Sky News previously revealed the government has never used the bill to order WhatsApp owner Meta to let authorities access encrypted messages, for example.
Apple says the changes erode some of these protections and afford more direct power to the home secretary.
Dr Nathalie Moreno, data protection partner at Addleshaw Goddard, told Sky News they “don’t seem subject to the clear conditions or guardrails normally in place to make such reform”.
Read more:
Suella Braverman says terror threat ‘rising’
Fears of summer surge in online child abuse
Home Secretary Suella Braverman
Why is Apple so opposed?
Apple has been a prominent opponent of efforts to have authorities access user data, even in extreme cases.
Following a mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, in 2015, the firm went to court against the FBI to stop it breaking into an iPhone used by the killer.
It has since made privacy a major part of its brand, and even backtracked on its own plan to scan people’s iCloud content for child sexual abuse material after a backlash from customers and security experts.
Robin Wilton, a director at the Internet Society, said Apple’s latest intervention was timed for maximum impact.
It came a day after the Online Safety Bill, the government’s flagship internet safety legislation which could force companies to scan messages for abuse content, made it through the House of Lords.
Mr Wilton told Sky News: “It’s not only driven by the proposed amendments to this act, but their perception of the general policy direction of the UK government.”
Read more:
Online Safety Bill ‘letting down girls’
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What is in the online safety bill?
Will Apple’s intervention have an impact?
Matthew Hodgson, the boss of UK-based messaging platform Element, which counts Britain’s Ministry of Defence among its clients, hopes the intervention of such a major company will scupper the proposals.
Mr Hodgson said firms were “not bluffing” by threatening to withdraw services from the UK due to the government’s stance on encryption. WhatsApp and Signal have claimed they will pull out if the Online Safety Bill forces them to let messages be scanned.
He told Sky News these “backdoors” could give bad actors the opportunity to break into them too.
“I am glad Apple is taking a strong line – the idea one has to seek permission from the government to add or change encryption on your product is terrifying,” he said.
“This strategy will only undermine our ability to provide secure communications because customers won’t trust us if they believe policy decisions have to be run past the government.”
The consultation is due to last for eight weeks.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We keep all legislation under review to ensure it is as strong as it can be, and this consultation is part of that process – no decisions have yet been made.”
The Online Safety Bill, meanwhile, is due to be debated by MPs after the summer break. Among its backers are children’s charities that have described private messaging as the “frontline” of child sexual abuse.
The BBC has said it regrets not pulling the live stream of Bob Vylan’s “unacceptable” Glastonbury set – as Ofcom said the broadcaster has “questions to answer”.
The corporation has faced mounting criticism over airing the performance on Glastonbury‘s West Holts Stage, during which the rap-punk duo’s frontman Bobby Vylan led chants of: “Free, free Palestine” and: “Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)”.
Sir Keir Starmer condemned the remarks as “appalling hate speech”, while festival organiser Emily Eavis said they “crossed a line” – and media watchdog Ofcom has now also released a statement raising concerns.
This morning, a spokesperson for the prime minister did not directly answer when asked if he still had confidence in BBC director-general Tim Davie.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What is the Glastonbury controversy?
Footage from Bob Vylan’s set on Saturday showed some of the crowd joining in, as the group performed in front of a screen that said Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to “genocide”.
Afterwards, the BBC said there had been a warning on screen about potential “strong and discriminatory language”, but described the comments as “deeply offensive”.
On Monday, a spokesperson released an updated statement, saying the comments were antisemitic and the performance should have been taken off air.
“The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence,” the statement said. “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves. We welcome Glastonbury’s condemnation of the performance.”
Pic: PA
A judgement to issue a warning on screen while streaming online was in line with editorial guidelines, the spokesperson added, and the performance has not been made available to view on demand.
“The team were dealing with a live situation but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.
“In light of this weekend, we will look at our guidance around live events so we can be sure teams are clear on when it is acceptable to keep output on air.”
Read more:
Who are Bob Vylan?
British-Israeli soldier killed while fighting in Gaza
Trump calls for ceasefire deal
An Ofcom spokesperson said: “We are very concerned about the live stream of this performance, and the BBC clearly has questions to answer.
“We have been speaking to the BBC over the weekend and we are obtaining further information as a matter of urgency, including what procedures were in place to ensure compliance with its own editorial guidelines.”
In a statement shared on Instagram on Sunday, Bobby Vylan said: “Teaching our children to speak up for the change they want and need is the only way that we make this world a better place.
“As we grow older and our fire starts to possibly dim under the suffocation of adult life and all its responsibilities, it is incredibly important that we encourage and inspire future generations to pick up the torch that was passed to us.”
The latest developments follows severe condemnation from the prime minister, who said there was “no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech”.
Mo Chara of Kneecap at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
Sir Keir also referenced a previous statement that Belfast rap group Kneecap, who were on stage after Bob Vylan, should have been removed from the line-up after one member was charged with a terrorism offence.
“I said that Kneecap should not be given a platform and that goes for any other performers making threats or inciting violence,” he said.
Ms Eavis, whose father Michael co-founded the festival, said in a statement that Bob Vylan had “very much crossed a line”.
She added: “Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.”
The Israeli embassy posted on X in the hours after the set, saying it was “deeply disturbed by the inflammatory and hateful rhetoric”.
It said the slogan used “advocates for the dismantling of the State of Israel”.
In a separate post on X on Sunday, Israel’s foreign ministry published graphic footage following the attack by Hamas on the Nova festival in Israel on 7 October 2023, and the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) said it would be formally complaining to the BBC over its “outrageous decision” to broadcast the performance.
Speaking to Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips on behalf of the government, Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the chant as “appalling”, especially at a music festival – “when there were Israelis at a similar music festival who were kidnapped, murdered, raped, and in some cases still held captive”.
He added that while “there’s no justification for inciting violence against Israelis… the way in which Israel’s conducting this war has made it extremely difficult for Israel’s allies around the world to stand by and justify”.
Lucy McMullin, who was in the crowd for Bob Vylan, told Sky News: “When there’s children and civilians being murdered and starved, then I think it’s important that people are speaking out on these issues.
“However, inciting more death and violence is not the way to do it.”
Police have said they are reviewing footage of both the Bob Vylan and Kneecap sets to assess whether any criminal offences were committed.
Speaking to Sky News earlier today, women and equalities minister Baroness Jacqui Smith said the comments “clearly” over-stepped the mark.
“I’m surprised that the BBC carried on broadcasting them live when it was obvious what was happening.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike