British PM Theresa May launches thinly veiled attacks on Apple and Facebook

“Theresa May launched a thinly veiled attack on Apple, Facebook and former BHS boss Sir Philip Green in her speech to Tory party conference today,” Mikey Smith reports for The Mirror. “She told party faithful she was putting people in positions of power on notice that “a change must come.””

“In a barely disguised swipe at Apple and Facebook, she attacked ‘household names’ who refuse to work with authorities to fight terrorism,” Smith reports. “It will be seen by many as a reference to both tech giants refusing to allow police and security services access to their encrypted messaging services.”

Smith reports, “Theresa May had a protracted battle with privacy campaigners and tech firms over her ‘snooper’s charter’ – which demanded Police and security services be able to break into private messages even if they are encrypted.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Another politician who doesn’t understand that encryption is binary; it’s either on or off.

You cannot have both. You either have privacy via full encryption or you don’t by forcing back doors upon Apple. It’s all or nothing.

There have been people that suggest that we should have a back door. But the reality is if you put a back door in, that back door’s for everybody, for good guys and bad guys. — Apple CEO Tim Cook

Without strong encryption (meaning no back doors), U.S. companies’ tech products would be eschewed around the world.

SEE ALSO:
Apple CEO Tim Cook touts encryption at Senator Orrin Hatch’s Utah Tech Tour – October 3, 2016
Feckless FBI unable to unlock iPhone, even with a ‘fingerprint unlock warrant’ – May 12, 2016
FBI’s Comey says agency paid more than $1 million to access San Bernadino iPhone – April 21, 2016
Nothing significant found on San Bernardino’s terrorist’s iPhone – April 14, 2016
FBI director confirms hack only works on older iPhones that lack Apple’s Secure Enclave – April 7, 2016
Apple responds to FBI: ‘This case should have never been brought’ – March 29, 2016

38 Comments

  1. I think the government can’t stand the notion of not getting in. They want strong encryption and a back door.

    The notion that Russia or another hacker can break in, is a risk they are willing to take.

    They want strong encryption for the protection of communication of national interest. They want to get into everyone else’s communication for the protection of national interests.

    See the problem here? It’s having one’s cake and eating it, problem. There is a slight grey area, but given time it’s a black and white, binary issue.

    Given national secrets, time is security, because relivancy changes on a day to day sometimes – hour to hour basis. For the common person (us) that’s not true, because we don’t like change.

    I just don’t see a winning option here. We need privacy for our own well being. We also ask for protection against adverse risks. The governments also want to limit adverse risks, and they see encryption as an obstical.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.