The United Kingdom has withdrawn a controversial order that would have forced Apple to grant government access to encrypted user data, according to the US director of national intelligence.
In a post on X, Tulsi Gabbard confirmed that London had dropped its requirement for Apple to create a so-called “back door” into its devices — a measure she said would have compromised the privacy of American citizens and “encroached on our civil liberties.”
The move marks a significant shift from a directive issued in December under the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act, which had demanded that Apple provide access to customer data stored worldwide. Apple had strongly resisted the order, warning that such a tool would effectively undermine encryption standards designed to protect billions of users.
Apple maintains that it cannot access user files secured under its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) system, a feature that ensures only device owners can view their information. To comply with the UK order, the company would have had to deliberately weaken its own encryption. “We have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services, and we never will,” Apple stated at the time.
In response to the notice, Apple withdrew ADP from the UK market and began legal proceedings to challenge the requirement, with a tribunal scheduled for early 2026. It remains unclear whether those proceedings will continue now that the government has reportedly withdrawn its demand.
The secrecy surrounding the order has raised further questions. Neither Apple nor the Home Office has publicly confirmed its existence, and it is unknown whether other major technology companies received similar notices. WhatsApp, one of the UK’s most widely used messaging platforms, has said it has not received such a demand.
Privacy advocates, long alarmed by the potential implications, welcomed news of the UK’s reversal. Sam Grant of the civil rights group Liberty called the decision “hugely welcome” but warned that the Investigatory Powers Act still poses risks. “The creation of a back door to citizens’ private data would be reckless and potentially unlawful,” he said, noting that politicians, activists and minority groups could be especially vulnerable if encryption were weakened.
Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, echoed the concerns, pointing out that while the order may have been withdrawn, “the UK’s powers to attack encryption are still on the law books, and pose a serious risk to user security and protection against criminal abuse of our data.”
The UK government declined to confirm details, saying only that it does not comment on operational matters. A spokesperson highlighted long-standing joint security arrangements with the United States to address threats such as terrorism and child exploitation.
Both countries already operate under a Data Access Agreement, which allows authorities to share data for law enforcement purposes.
For now, Apple and privacy campaigners are treating the development as a victory — but one that leaves the broader debate over encryption and government powers far from settled.
