The Washington Post reported that the United Kingdom is demanding that Apple create an encryption backdoor to give the government access to end-to-end encrypted data in iCloud. Encryption is one of the best ways we have to reclaim our privacy and security in a digital world filled with cyberattacks and security breaches, and there’s no way to weaken it in order to only provide access to the “good guys.” We call on Apple to resist this attempt to undermine the right to private spaces and communications.

As reported, the British government’s undisclosed order was issued last month, and requires the capability to view all encrypted material in iCloud. The core target is Apple’s Advanced Data Protection, which is an optional feature that turns on end-to-end encryption for backups and other data stored in iCloud, making it so that even Apple cannot access that information. For a long time, iCloud backups were a loophole for law enforcement to gain access to data otherwise not available to them on iPhones with device encryption enabled. That loophole still exists for anyone who doesn’t opt in to using Advanced Data Protection. If Apple does comply, users should consider disabling iCloud backups entirely. Perhaps most concerning, the U.K. is apparently seeking a backdoor into users’ data regardless of where they are or what citizenship they have.

There is no technological compromise between strong encryption that protects the data and a mechanism to allow the government special access to this data. Any “backdoor” built for the government puts everyone at greater risk of hacking, identity theft, and fraud. There is no world where, once built, these backdoors would only be used by open and democratic governments. These systems can be, and quickly will be, used by more repressive governments around the world to read protesters’ and dissenters’ communications. We’ve seen and opposed these sorts of measures for years. Now is no different.

Perhaps most concerning, the U.K. is apparently seeking a backdoor into users’ data regardless of where they are or what citizenship they have.

Of course, Apple is not the only company who uses end-to-end encryption. Some of Google’s backup options employ similar protections, as do many chat apps, cloud backup services, and more. If the U.K. government secures access to the encrypted data of Apple users through a backdoor, every other secure file-sharing, communication, and backup tool is at risk.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., just last year we had a top U.S. cybersecurity chief declare that “encryption is your friend,” taking a welcome break from the messaging we’ve seen over the years at EFF. Even the FBI, which has frequently pushed for easier access to data by law enforcement, issued the same recommendation.

There is no legal mechanism for the U.S. government to force this same sort of rule on Apple, and we’d hope to see Apple continue to resist it as they have in the past. But what happens in the U.K. will still affect users around the world, especially as the U.K. order specifically stated that Apple would be prohibited from warning its users that its Advanced Data Protection measures no longer work as initially designed.

Weakening encryption violates fundamental human rights and annihilates our right to private spaces. Apple has to continue fighting against this ruling to keep backdoors off users’ devices.

Minors, like everyone else, have First Amendment rights. These rights extend to their ability to use social media both to speak and access the speech of others online. But these rights are under attack, as many states seek to limit minors’ use of social media through age verification measures and outright bans. California’s SB 976, or the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act, prohibits minors from using a key feature of social media platforms—personalized recommendation systems, or newsfeeds. This law impermissibly burdens minors’ ability to communicate and find others’ speech on social media. 

On February 6th, 2025, EFF, alongside the Freedom to Read Foundation and Library Futures, filed a brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in NetChoice v. Bonta urging the court to overturn the district court decision partially denying a preliminary injunction of SB 976.  

SB 976 passed into law in September of 2024, and prohibits various online platforms from providing personalized recommendation systems to minors without parental consent. For now, this prohibition only applies where the platforms know a user is a minor. Starting in 2027, however, the platforms will need to estimate the age of all their users based on regulations promulgated by the California attorney general. This means that (1) all users of platforms with these systems will need to pass through an age gate to continue using these features, and (2) children without parental consent will be denied access to the protected speech that is organized and distributed via newsfeeds. This is separate from the fact that feeds are central to most platforms’ user experience, and it’s not clear how social media platforms can or will adapt the experience for young people to comply with this law. Because these effects burden both users and platforms’ First Amendment rights, EFF filed this friend-of-the-court brief. This work is part of our broader fight against similar age-verification laws at the state and federal levels. 

EFF got involved in this suit both to advocate for the First Amendment rights of adult and minor users and to correct the dangerous logic by the district court. The district court, hearing NetChoice’s challenge on behalf of online platforms, ruled that the personalized feeds covered by SB 976 are not expressive, and therefore not covered by the First Amendment. The lower court took an extremely narrow view of what constitutes expressive activity, writing that algorithms behind personalized newsfeeds don’t reflect the messages or editorial choices of their human creators and therefore do not trigger First Amendment scrutiny. The Ninth Circuit has since stayed the district court’s ruling, preliminarily blocking the law from taking effect until it has a chance to consider the issues. 

EFF pushed back on this flawed reasoning, arguing that “the personalized feeds targeted by SB 976 are inherently expressive, because they (1) reflect the choices made by platforms to organize content on their services, (2) incorporate and respond to the expression users create to distribute users’ speech, and (3) provide users with the means to access speech in a digestible and organized way.” Moreover, the presence of these personalized recommendation systems informs the speech that users create on platforms, as users often create content with the intent of it getting “picked up” by the algorithm and delivered to other users.  

SB 976 burdens the First Amendment rights of minor social media users by blocking their use of primary systems created to distribute their own speech and to hear others’ speech via those systems, EFF’s brief argues. The statute also burdens all internet users’ First Amendment rights because the age-verification scheme it requires will block some adults from accessing lawful speech, make it impossible for them to speak anonymously on these services, and increase their risk of privacy invasions. Under the law, adults and minors alike will need to provide identifying documents to prove their age, which chills users of any age who wish to remain anonymous from accessing protected speech, excludes adults lacking proper documentation, and exposes those who do share their documentation to data breaches or sale of their data. 

We hope the Ninth Circuit recognizes that personalized recommendation systems are expressive in nature, subjects SB 976 to strict scrutiny, and rejects the district court ruling.

Related Cases: NetChoice Must-Carry Litigation

　編集者・蔦屋重三郎を育てた磁場吉原を、サブカルチャーの悪所としての牙城と著者は位置づける。活きた悪所の行く先を編集という企画力で守り通す体現者が蔦(つた)重(じゅう)だ。　十二章のうち「Ⅳ 洒 落本を編集する」が殊に面白い。その一節、蔦重の盟友・朋誠堂(めいせいどう)喜三二(きみじ)こと道陀楼麻阿(どうだろうまあ)が著した 『娼(しょう)妃(ひ)地理記』（1777年刊）への視線だ。　これは蔦重が喜三二と洒落本出版に乗り出した最初の作品。見立てとうがちの諧謔は、第一級と評価さ..

ABC・TV記者が米軍のブラックホーク・ヘリコプターに便乗して、ガザの崩壊を紹介しました。　トランプ・ネタニヤフ連合軍がホワイトハウスで会談し、ネタニヤフにおだてられたトランプが、「パレスチナ人はガザを去るべきだ、、ガザは素晴らしい所だ、」と、貧しい語彙で語り、その後の記者会見で「米軍派兵は必要だ」と言った直後のABCニュースだったので、「はや米軍は参戦か？！」と、寒気がしました。　ブラックホーク・ヘリコプターは、民間機に突っ込んで有名になりましたが、イラク戦争では、多くのイラク市民を夜店の射撃ゲームのように遊び殺ししたことで、悪名を轟かせました。

"As much as both agencies insist that drones are «helping to save human lives», according to Chris Jones, executive director of the NGO Statewatch, the facts say otherwise: «We know that stopping migrants from reaching Italy is a priority for both Italy and the EU, and we know that one way to achieve this is by using drones to detect migrants and then send them back to Tunisia and Libya». It is up to Frontex and the Guardia di Finanza to dispel these concerns."

Full story: The silence of Italy’s Guardia di Finanza on drones deployed in the Mediterranean

Schneider Electricが提供する複数の製品には、複数の脆弱性が存在します。

ABBが提供するDrive Composerには、パストラバーサルの脆弱性が存在します。

Trimbleが提供するCityworksには、信頼できないデータのデシリアライゼーションの脆弱性が存在します。

MicroDicomが提供するDICOM Viewerには、不適切な証明書検証の脆弱性が存在します。

Orthancが提供するOrthanc Serverには、重要な機能に対する認証の欠如の脆弱性が存在します。

This submission draws on the election-related work and observations of APC staff, its members and associates to offer considerations in five areas, such as disinformation campaigns and information…

Community members coordinated to pack Little Rock City Hall on Tuesday, where board members voted 5-3 to end the city's contract with ShotSpotter.

Initially funded through a federal grant, Little Rock began its experiment with the “gunshot detection” sensors in 2018. ShotSpotter (now SoundThinking) has long been accused of steering federal grants toward local police departments in an effort to secure funding for the technology. Members of Congress are investigating this funding. EFF has long encouraged communities to follow the money that pays for police surveillance technology.

Now, faced with a $188,000 contract renewal using city funds, Little Rock has joined the growing number of cities nationwide that have rejected, ended, or called into question their use of the invasive, error-prone technology.

EFF has been a vocal critic of gunshot detection systems and extensively documented how ShotSpotter sensors risk capturing private conversations and enable discriminatory policing—ultimately calling on cities to stop using the technology.

This call has been echoed by grassroots advocates coordinating through networks like the National Stop ShotSpotter Coalition. Community organizers have dedicated countless hours to popular education, canvassing neighborhoods, and conducting strategic research to debunk the company's spurious marketing claims.

Through that effort, Little Rock has now joined the ranks of cities throughout the country to reject surveillance technologies like gunshot detection that harm marginalized communities and fail time and time again to deliver meaningful public safety. 

If you live in a city that's also considering dropping (or installing) ShotSpotter, share this news with your community and local officials!