How is an exploration of broad spectrum legislative attacks on all forms of encryption regardless of hosting and corporate ownership and data communication moot?
The UK has to formally ask for a backdoor, the United States has the leverage to coerce Apple into implimenting one while demanding that it remain a secret. We don't know if the US has implemented equivalent iCloud backdoors yet, it might be under wraps like the push notification bug.
Maybe that doesn't concern you though, and that's fine. Apple is always looking for customers that don't care that much about their devices.
Is there any particular reason you ignored Apple's admission of extralegal surveillance that they were demanded to hide by the US government?
If you want to turn this into a relativist pissing contest, be my guest. I think it's a moot point, since the United States is complicit in an even more heinous form of surveillance. Don't moralize to me when America refuses to lead by example, this is the precedent that we set.
For a start the vector is very different. And I don't doubt there are unknown other attacks. But I'm discussing attacks we know about because they put them in policy papers and legislation.
