The ongoing encryption battle between Apple and the UK government has caught the attention of Tulsi Gabbard, the new US Director of National Intelligence. She criticized the UK’s demand for Apple to create a backdoor to iCloud accounts, calling it a clear violation of Americans’ privacy and civil liberties. In a letter to British lawmakers, Gabbard emphasized that any data-sharing agreement between governments and private companies must respect US law and the constitutional rights of American citizens.
Her concerns align with those of US Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Andy Biggs, who raised alarms in a February 13 letter about the security risks such a demand could pose for Americans. Gabbard warned that the UK’s move could open up a dangerous vulnerability, making user data susceptible to exploitation by adversarial actors. She also noted that the demand might violate the Cloud Act, a bilateral agreement between the US and UK that prevents either government from making direct demands for data belonging to each other’s citizens.
The controversy began when the UK Home Office issued a “technical capability notice” under the Investigatory Powers Act, requiring Apple to assist British law enforcement in accessing encrypted iCloud data. Apple, rather than building a backdoor, responded by entirely removing its Advanced Data Protection feature, stating that it had no other choice. The company has long resisted government demands for user data, a stance it famously maintained when refusing to unlock an iPhone for the FBI in a 2015 terrorism case.
Apple has not publicly commented on the UK’s latest request. Meanwhile, Gabbard admitted she wasn’t aware of the UK government’s order until media reports surfaced. She has since called on US security agencies—including the CIA, FBI, and NSA—to assess the implications of the UK’s actions. Legal experts within the US government are also reviewing whether the demand violates existing agreements.
The UK’s decision to push for an encryption backdoor has reignited the debate over digital privacy and government surveillance. While officials argue it’s necessary for law enforcement, privacy advocates warn it sets a dangerous precedent. As the standoff continues, the battle over data security, privacy, and government oversight remains a pressing issue for tech companies and policymakers worldwide.