A proposed Canadian online safety law has triggered a growing confrontation between the government and major technology firms, with Apple, Google, Alphabet and encrypted messaging platform Signal warning that the legislation could weaken digital security and undermine user privacy. Bill C-22 which was introduced by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal government, is currently being debated in Canada’s parliament. The legislation aims to modernise how law enforcement agencies investigate cybercrime, terrorism and national security threats by expanding access to digital communications and user data. It expand the powers of Canadian law enforcement agencies to access digital information during cyber and national security investigations.&nbsp;At the centre of the dispute is encryption, the technology that protects messages, files and cloud data from unauthorised access. End-to-end encryption ensures that only the sender and recipient can read the data, meaning even technology companies themselves cannot access it. Canadian authorities insist the bill is ‘encryption neutral’ and necessary to investigate serious crimes and national security threats more efficiently. However, tech giants argue the legislation could effectively compel firms to create covert ‘backdoors’ into their systems. The firms are now seeking to include judicial oversight and stronger protections for encryption.<h2>What Bill C-22 Would Allow</h2>The bill would require ‘core’ telecommunications and digital service providers to build technical capabilities enabling law enforcement agencies to obtain access to information. It would also mandate the retention of user metadata for up to one year.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/why-are-thousands-of-young-chinese-applying-for-shepherd-jobs-viral-ad-exposes-labour-market-strains-1779884435095">Why are thousands of young Chinese applying for shepherd jobs? Viral ad exposes labour market strains</a>&nbsp;One of the most contentious provisions concerns ministerial powers. Under Bill C-22, the federal government could issue orders to companies requiring compliance measures without prior judicial approval. Technology firms argue this creates the possibility of secret orders to build a backdoor into their services or ​devices without disclosing that backdoor to users or the public.&nbsp;Jeanette Patell, Google Canada’s director of government affairs and public policy, told the House of Commons public safety committee that the proposed powers “could give the government the power to secretly force companies to redesign products, to include invasive surveillance capabilities, and to do so without sufficient safeguards or oversight”.She added that “ministerial orders are not only alarming, but also unnecessary”, arguing Canada already possesses a transparent court-supervised system for lawful access requests.<h2>Why Apple and Google Say Encryption Is at Risk</h2>Apple and Google maintain that no secure method exists to create access points solely for governments while preventing exploitation by malicious actors. “Speaking as an engineer, we do not know of a way to deploy encryption technology that provides access only for the good guys without creating new ways for the bad guys to break in,” Apple’s senior director of user privacy and child safety, Erik Neuenschwander, told MPs. “In other words, when you build a backdoor into an encrypted device, anyone can walk through.”&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/oil-spikes-airlines-stumble-ai-stocks-soar-the-sectors-gaining-and-losing-most-from-the-iran-war-1779877830509">Oil spikes, airlines stumble, AI stocks soar: The sectors gaining and losing most from the Iran war</a>&nbsp;Neuenschwander pointed to the 2024 Salt Typhoon cyberattack on US government systems, which allegedly exploited lawful access infrastructure. “That law was narrower than Bill C-22,” he warned. “So imagine what could happen if more companies were required to create these vulnerabilities.” Google similarly warned that the legislation “goes well beyond lawful access regimes in other G7 democracies” and risks undermining user trust and privacy protections.<h2>Signal Threatens to Leave Canada</h2>Signal, widely regarded as one of the world’s most secure messaging services, has gone further. Udbhav Tiwari, the company’s vice-president of strategy and global affairs, told The Globe and Mail that Signal “would rather pull out of the country than be compelled to compromise on the privacy promises we have made to our users”. The company fears the legislation could ultimately force encrypted services either to weaken security protections or withdraw entirely from the Canadian market.&nbsp;Apple has already faced a similar confrontation in Britain. Last year, after receiving a secret government demand for access to encrypted cloud-stored data, the company withdrew certain encrypted cloud backup features from the UK market rather than alter its security architecture.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/ai-beats-human-forecasters-in-tournament-predicting-outcomes-for-30-tech-ventures-1779875686948">AI beats human forecasters in tournament predicting fate of 30 technology startups</a><h2>Part of a Wider Global Debate</h2>Canada’s bill mirrors measures introduced elsewhere. Australia enacted laws compelling technology firms to assist authorities in accessing encrypted communications, while Britain’s Investigatory Powers framework has repeatedly drawn criticism from privacy advocates and technology companies.&nbsp;The controversy has now crossed into the United States. US House Chairs Jim Jordan and Brian Mast sent an official letter to Canada’s Minister of Public Safety expressing severe concerns over Canada's proposed cybersecurity legislation, Bill C-22. The letter, sent by the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs committees, warned that Bill C-22 could “drastically expand Canada’s surveillance and data access powers” and create “significant cross-border risks to the security and data privacy of Americans”.&nbsp;The clash over Bill C-22 ultimately reflects a broader international struggle: how democracies balance national security and criminal investigations with the integrity of digital privacy and encrypted communications. For governments, encrypted platforms can obstruct investigations. For technology companies, any deliberate vulnerability risks becoming a gateway not only for law enforcement, but also for hackers, cybercriminals and hostile states.&nbsp;

The legislation aims to modernise how law enforcement agencies investigate cybercrime, terrorism and national security threats by expanding access to digital communications and user data.

A proposed Canadian online safety law has triggered a growing confrontation between the government and major technology firms, with Apple, Google, Alphabet and encrypted messaging platform Signal warning that the legislation could weaken digital security and undermine user privacy. Bill C-22 which was introduced by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal government, is currently being debated in Canada’s parliament. The legislation aims to modernise how law enforcement agencies investigate cybercrime, terrorism and national security threats by expanding access to digital communications and user data. It expand the powers of Canadian law enforcement agencies to access digital information during cyber and national security investigations. At the centre of the dispute is encryption, the technology that protects messages, files and cloud data from unauthorised access. End-to-end encryption ensures that only the sender and recipient can read the data, meaning even technology companies themselves cannot access it. Canadian authorities insist the bill is ‘encryption neutral’ and necessary to investigate serious crimes and national security threats more efficiently. However, tech giants argue the legislation could effectively compel firms to create covert ‘backdoors’ into their systems. The firms are now seeking to include judicial oversight and stronger protections for encryption. What Bill C-22 Would Allow The bill would require ‘core’ telecommunications and digital service providers to build technical capabilities enabling law enforcement agencies to obtain access to information. It would also mandate the retention of user metadata for up to one year. ALSO READ: Why are thousands of young Chinese applying for shepherd jobs? Viral ad exposes labour market strains One of the most contentious provisions concerns ministerial powers. Under Bill C-22, the federal government could issue orders to companies requiring compliance measures without prior judicial approval. Technology firms argue this creates the possibility of secret orders to build a backdoor into their services or devices without disclosing that backdoor to users or the public. Jeanette Patell, Google Canada’s director of government affairs and public policy, told the House of Commons public safety committee that the proposed powers “could give the government the power to secretly force companies to redesign products, to include invasive surveillance capabilities, and to do so without sufficient safeguards or oversight”. She added that “ministerial orders are not only alarming, but also unnecessary”, arguing Canada already possesses a transparent court-supervised system for lawful access requests. Why Apple and Google Say Encryption Is at Risk Apple and Google maintain that no secure method exists to create access points solely for governments while preventing exploitation by malicious actors. “Speaking as an engineer, we do not know of a way to deploy encryption technology that provides access only for the good guys without creating new ways for the bad guys to break in,” Apple’s senior director of user privacy and child safety, Erik Neuenschwander, told MPs. “In other words, when you build a backdoor into an encrypted device, anyone can walk through.” ALSO READ: Oil spikes, airlines stumble, AI stocks soar: The sectors gaining and losing most from the Iran war Neuenschwander pointed to the 2024 Salt Typhoon cyberattack on US government systems, which allegedly exploited lawful access infrastructure. “That law was narrower than Bill C-22,” he warned. “So imagine what could happen if more companies were required to create these vulnerabilities.” Google similarly warned that the legislation “goes well beyond lawful access regimes in other G7 democracies” and risks undermining user trust and privacy protections. Signal Threatens to Leave Canada Signal, widely regarded as one of the world’s most secure messaging services, has gone further. Udbhav Tiwari, the company’s vice-president of strategy and global affairs, told The Globe and Mail that Signal “would rather pull out of the country than be compelled to compromise on the privacy promises we have made to our users”. The company fears the legislation could ultimately force encrypted services either to weaken security protections or withdraw entirely from the Canadian market. Apple has already faced a similar confrontation in Britain. Last year, after receiving a secret government demand for access to encrypted cloud-stored data, the company withdrew certain encrypted cloud backup features from the UK market rather than alter its security architecture. ALSO READ: AI beats human forecasters in tournament predicting fate of 30 technology startups Part of a Wider Global Debate Canada’s bill mirrors measures introduced elsewhere. Australia enacted laws compelling technology firms to assist authorities in accessing encrypted communications, while Britain’s Investigatory Powers framework has repeatedly drawn criticism from privacy advocates and technology companies. The controversy has now crossed into the United States. US House Chairs Jim Jordan and Brian Mast sent an official letter to Canada’s Minister of Public Safety expressing severe concerns over Canada's proposed cybersecurity legislation, Bill C-22. The letter, sent by the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs committees, warned that Bill C-22 could “drastically expand Canada’s surveillance and data access powers” and create “significant cross-border risks to the security and data privacy of Americans”. The clash over Bill C-22 ultimately reflects a broader international struggle: how democracies balance national security and criminal investigations with the integrity of digital privacy and encrypted communications. For governments, encrypted platforms can obstruct investigations. For technology companies, any deliberate vulnerability risks becoming a gateway not only for law enforcement, but also for hackers, cybercriminals and hostile states.

The legislation aims to modernise how law enforcement agencies investigate cybercrime, terrorism and national security threats by expanding access to digital communications and user data.

What is Canada’s online safety bill? Why tech giants like Apple & Google oppose it, what it means for user privacy | WION Decodes

bill-c-22

Bill C 22, News on Bill C 22, stories on Bill C 22, articles on Bill C 22, Bill C 22 stories at Wion, Bill C 22 news, Bill C 22 latest news

bill c-22

What is Canada’s online safety bill? Why tech giants like Apple & Google oppose it, what it means for user privacy | WION Decodes