Apple and Meta have publicly spoken out against Projeto of Lei C-22, a Canadian legislative proposal that the companies say could force them to weaken encryption systems or insert backdoors into their products. The project is still being debated on the Canadian Comuns’s Câmara, presented by Partido Liberal.
Estrutura of the proposal and concerns of technology giants
The proposal, while not specifically mentioning encryption, would expand the investigative tools available to Canadian law enforcement authorities in accessing digital information related to criminal investigations. Apple argues that the anticipated access powers could be interpreted as authorization to force the weakening of encrypted services. Meta warned that the project could require the creation of features that break, weaken, or bypass zero-knowledge encryption, as well as force providers to install government surveillance software.
Apple’s official statement to Reuters makes the company’s position clear: “At a time of increasing and widespread threats from malicious actors seeking access to user information, Projeto’s Lei C-22, as written, would harm our ability to deliver the powerful privacy and security features that users expect from Apple. Essa legislation could allow the government Canadian company forced companies to break encryption by inserting backdoors into their products – something Apple will never do.”
Histórico of clashes with governments
Este conflict at Canadá resurfaces in an already consolidated context of tensions between technology giants and government authorities over encryption and data access. The previous year, Apple faced a high-profile dispute with the British government when Reino Unido issued an order forcing technology companies to insert back doors into encryption systems. Apple’s response was to suspend Dados’s offering of Proteção Avançada to new users in the country, while existing users would eventually be forced to deactivate it.
Proteção Avançada is a program that offers end-to-end encryption for almost all files stored in iCloud, specifically against government agencies. Segundo reports, the British government has given in to pressure from Estados Unidos on the issue. Apple publicly reaffirmed at that time that it had never created, and would never create, any backdoor or master key to its products or services.
Precedentes lawsuits and broader context
The public dispute with Reino Unido has reignited previous debates about government access to encrypted Apple user data. The case of San Bernardino, in 2015, profoundly marked this discussion. At the time, the FBI asked Apple to create a modified version of iOS to access an iPhone during a criminal investigation. Apple publicly refused. The FBI later dropped the request after finding another way to access the device without help from the company.
Agora, facing a potentially similar situation to Canadá, Apple reiterates its historical positioning. Executivos of Meta, in prepared testimony for Canadian lawmakers, echoed similar concerns, asserting that measures like those envisioned in Projeto of Lei C-22 would compromise companies’ ability to offer robust privacy to users.
Cronograma legislative and next steps
Projeto of Lei C-22 was presented by Partido Liberal of Canadá after gaining a parliamentary majority recently. The measure is still under discussion in the Câmara of the Comuns, which means that the period of legislative debate remains open. Apple and Meta’s public positions during this deliberation process replicate the model of action that both companies have adopted in previous cases:
- Comunicação official to press agencies over technical and privacy objections
- Publicação of formal statements highlighting incompatibility with existing encryption models
- Narrative Mobilização about user protection and security
- Engajamento in legislative proceedings to present corporate perspectives
The difference between implicit versus explicit backdoor demands remains central to the Canadian debate. Enquanto project text does not directly mention encryption, the companies argue that the powers granted to authorities could be used to force its weakening. Essa’s broad interpretation of legislative powers reflects the dynamics that have also characterized previous conflicts in other jurisdictions.
