A PYMNTS Company

UK Demands Access to Apple’s Encrypted Cloud Data, Spark Legal and Privacy Battle

By  |  March 16, 2025
 London court hearing related to Apple’s appeal against a British government order concerning access to encrypted cloud storage took place behind closed doors on Friday, with the media barred from attending despite a formal request for access. The case, reportedly an appeal by Apple against the UK’s demand for a “back door” to its encrypted systems, has been surrounded by secrecy, with little information released to the public.

According to Reuters, the dispute began in February when The Washington Post reported that the UK had issued a “technical capability notice” (TCN) to Apple, demanding the company enable authorities to access encrypted messages and photos, even for users outside the UK. In response, Apple took the step of removing its most advanced encryption, called Advanced Data Protection, for new users in Britain.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    Despite the heightened controversy surrounding the case, neither Apple nor the UK government has publicly confirmed the existence of the TCN. As per Reuters, the details of the hearing on Friday were described by the BBC as an “application in private” at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, a court that typically handles allegations of unlawful surveillance. Although the court did not officially reveal which parties were involved, it was noted that James Eadie, a senior government lawyer, attended the session. However, when approached for comment, Eadie declined to speak.

    We’d love to be your preferred source for news.

    Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!

    Add as Preferred Source

    Read more: Apple Wins Dismissal of iCloud Antitrust Lawsuit, but Plaintiffs May Refile

    Representatives from the media, including Reuters and the BBC, attempted to make the case public, with a lawyer representing ten media organizations submitting a formal request for transparency. However, the tribunal confirmed receiving the email but denied the lawyer the opportunity to address the judges. The courtroom remained closed to reporters throughout the six-hour hearing.

    In response to the secrecy surrounding the case, two civil rights organizations—Privacy International and Liberty—expressed their strong objections. Caroline Wilson Palow, the Legal Director of Privacy International, called the British government’s actions “unacceptable and disproportionate.” Palow further emphasized the global importance of end-to-end encryption in protecting individuals from oppression and harassment, stating that “No country should have the power to undermine that protection for everyone.”

    This legal battle comes amidst a long-standing conflict between governments and technology companies over encryption and privacy. Authorities argue that strong encryption can impede investigations into serious crimes such as terrorism and child exploitation. However, the UK’s demands have drawn significant criticism, with U.S. officials raising concerns about the potential violation of international agreements. According to Reuters, President Donald Trump commented last month, criticizing the UK’s stance, noting that it resembled policies often seen in China. U.S. officials are reportedly investigating whether the UK’s actions violate the CLOUD Act, an agreement that prohibits the demand for U.S. citizens’ data between the U.S. and other countries.

    The UK’s Home Office has remained silent on the specifics of the case, and when questioned in parliament, Security Minister Dan Jarvis refused to confirm or deny the existence of TCNs. Jarvis did assert, however, that privacy and security are not mutually exclusive and that it is possible to maintain both.

    Source: Reuters