The UK government is reportedly preparing to back down from its controversial demand that Apple create a backdoor into its encrypted iCloud data — a move largely prompted by pressure from U.S. officials, including Vice President J.D. Vance.
In 2024, the UK Home Office issued a secret directive under the Investigatory Powers Act requiring Apple to provide access not just to UK users’ data but to encrypted data of Apple’s worldwide users. The demand was kept confidential under a gag order, but Apple revealed its existence when it was forced to disable its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) encryption feature in the UK, thereby weakening the privacy of users in that region.
The UK justified the demand as necessary for criminal investigations involving serious crimes; however, critics argued it was an unprecedented breach of privacy and could dangerously undermine global encryption protections. Moreover, by seeking access to data globally, the UK’s move risked violating international privacy laws and straining diplomatic relations.
Following the revelation, the U.S. government, including former President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, strongly opposed the UK’s position. Reports from the Financial Times and other outlets reveal that U.S. officials view the demand as a “red line” and have exerted diplomatic pressure for the UK to rescind or modify its request. A UK technology department official was quoted saying, “This is something that the vice-president is very upset about. And it needs to be resolved. The Home Office is going to have to back down.”
Sources indicate the UK government is now seeking a way to avoid escalating the standoff, acknowledging that the issue has become “a problem of the Home Office’s own making.” This reconsideration may allow Apple to restore the ADP feature in the UK and reduce tensions between the tech giant and government authorities.
Apple has maintained that creating backdoors would compromise security for all users and could expose data to bad actors worldwide. The company has previously stated it would rather withdraw critical privacy features than weaken encryption under government pressure.
This development underscores the complexity of balancing national security interests and user privacy rights in an increasingly connected world. It also highlights the growing influence of international diplomatic relations on technology policy, particularly when demands made by one government affect users globally.
As the UK appears to retreat from its hardline demand, the case sets an important precedent for the future of end-to-end encryption and government access to data, showing that heavy-handed regulatory demands may face stiff resistance not only from the tech industry but also from allied governments.