The government’s encryption series with Apple ‘really strange’, says expert, expert says

The position of the government in its privacy and encryption series with Apple is “really strange” and “makes no sense,” said an expert.

At the beginning of this year it was reported that the government had issued a notification according to the ACT 2016 for investigators, in which Apple was asked to access data by Apple users.

This should include encrypted data protected by the Advanced Data Protection (ADP) of the tech giant, an opt-in tool in the iCloud service of Apple, to which only one account holder can access, and is currently outside the reach of Apple.

The iPhone manufacturer said that the tool in Great Britain has withdrawn from use, switched it off as an option for those who have not yet used, and will introduce a process to push existing users away from it and collect legal measures against the home office.

Robin Wilton, Senior Director for Internet Trust at the Internet Society, a non -profit organization that is committed to a safe and accessible Internet for everyone, said he did not understand the government’s approach.

He said it was unlikely that the iCloud backups from Apple users would be a probable place for bad actors to keep records about their crimes.

“I don’t really see what you expect,” he told the PA news agency.

“I know that the standard response is.

“And how many people are actually accidentally or otherwise proof of criminal activities in their iCloud backups? To this extent it doesn’t make a big sense for me.”

The government’s approach was criticized in detail by online activists and experts from online private sphere when reports on the first request appeared, and Mr. Wilton said that the attitude of Great Britain’s trust problems in other areas of technology could cause, including artificial intelligence (AI).

“I think there are also some negative aspects that I find really bizarre in the context of this government,” he told PA.

“We have heard that this government talks a lot about its expectations of AI and machine learning to start the British economy.

“And I do not think the way I look at this is that every AI that is worth running only on your device is carried out exclusively on your device – either it will be made on a server or is actually only processed on the server and a result is brought back.

“So what is the status of things that happens on the server? Is that your or or is that under the company’s care that executes the server?

“The approach of this government seems to be that it does not belong to them and that it is a fair game.

“So if things that run on my request or in my name on other people’s computers, like iCloud backups, then I don’t see why AI systems are treated differently.

“And therefore, why should I trust these systems with something sensitive or confidential, let alone criminals.”

Last week the Home Office lost the offer to keep the legal measures raised by Apple against the government.

Last month, the Investigatory Powers of Tribunal, a specialist Tribunal, who deals with allegations of illegal penetration and some national security issues, sat for a full -day hearing behind closed doors, in which the identity of the parties involved was not publicly known.

In a public judgment last Monday, however, the tribunal judges said that the case related to legal steps, which Apple made due to the authorization to announce technical skills in accordance with the law on investigative powers.

Following the judgment, the Interior Ministry said that it did not comment on legal proceedings or operational questions, but the first priority was to “bring people to safety” and emphasized that it had not been looking for general data access.

However, Mr. Wilton said that the government’s attitude openly could leave it open to other legal challenges in the future.

“I think the position of this government is really strange,” he said.

“As a lawyer, the prime minister must know that the EU already sees its mobile device as part of its so -called private sphere because it is so closely connected to her life.

“And I don’t see how you can see and think that the fact that I have allowed my device to base my device in a encrypted way in the cloud is less expectation of privacy than for what is on the device itself.

“I think this government is based on the human rights law open to challenges, on the basis that the encrypted data in my iCloud backup should be regarded as part of my personal and private sphere.”