Apple’s Advanced Data Protection (ADP) is a privacy feature that has seen minimal adoption. Many casual users are not aware of it, and a significant number of tech enthusiasts haven’t activated it either.
Thus, Apple’s resistance against the UK government’s crackdown on ADP might not initially appear significant—but I contend that its implications are far more profound than they seem, for three key reasons…
The UK’s Global Assault on ADP
We’ve previously discussed what ADP entails and its significance, but in brief, it extends end-to-end encryption to nearly all your iCloud data. Essentially, this means that Apple cannot access your data, and cannot be compelled to provide access to any governmental bodies that attempt to intervene.
Introduced in 2022, ADP has not really gained much traction. It remains disabled by default, generally limited to users who prioritize security. Until recently.
Apple Exposed a Secret Directive
The draconian legislation in question stipulates that companies receiving these orders cannot disclose their existence. The intention is to allow tech companies to be compelled to compromise their customers’ private data without ever alerting the users.
Apple was legally bound not to inform the public that it had been instructed to establish backdoor access to ADP. Instead, the company cleverly announced that it would cease offering ADP in the UK, without elaborating on the reasoning.
“Apple can no longer provide Advanced Data Protection (ADP) to new users in the United Kingdom, and existing UK users will eventually be required to disable this security feature. ADP safeguards iCloud data with end-to-end encryption, which means only the user with access can decrypt the data, and only on their verified devices. We are profoundly disappointed that ADP’s protections will not be available to our customers in the UK […] As we have stated repeatedly, we have never created a backdoor or master key for our products or services, and we never will.”
This statement left no room for misinterpretation. In effect, it communicated: “we cannot disclose that the UK government has compelled us to integrate a backdoor into ADP, nor can we disclose our refusal to do so.”
Moreover, it has come to light that Apple is contesting the secret order that cannot be disclosed to the public.
The iPhone manufacturer has filed its appeal with the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, an independent judicial entity that scrutinizes complaints directed at UK intelligence services, according to informed sources.
Of course, it’s not Apple leaking information only it would possess, as that would be illegal.
Apple Has Turned a Specialized Feature into Headline News
The UK and US are both participants in a significant international intelligence alliance dubbed the Five Eyes, which has previously informed the tech sector that “privacy is not absolute” and that end-to-end encryption “should be rare.” These nations are accustomed to safeguarding one another’s secrets.
However, due to the UK government’s overreach demanding access not only to accounts of its own citizens but to iCloud users globally—and because Apple effectively disclosed the secret directive without explicitly stating it—the US government felt compelled to respond publicly.
Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, stated in a letter to Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona that she was not apprised of the UK’s clandestine request by her UK counterparts. Nevertheless, she suggested that the UK government might have violated a mutual privacy and surveillance agreement by making this demand.
A combination of the UK government’s miscalculation and Apple’s firm stance has transformed what was once a niche feature utilized by a small fraction of iCloud users into a national conversation.
This Holds Importance for Three Reasons
First, this situation has considerably elevated public awareness about end-to-end encryption, and more specifically, Advanced Data Protection.
Second, governments globally have now recognized that this type of secret directive—complete with gag clauses—will not keep them shielded from public scrutiny, especially since Apple can be relied upon to bring such matters into the spotlight.
Third, it has placed the US government in a very precarious position should it wish to issue a similar secret order following its own legislation. It is aware that Apple would inform the public about the order without disclosing the order’s specifics, and that it would face accusations of hypocrisy after criticizing the actions of the British government.
Apple isn’t merely resisting the UK government; it is also asserting its stance against all governments worldwide that might seek to emulate the British example.
Photo by Peter Forster on Unsplash
