British Public Oppose Secret Surveillance Powers and Want Strong Protections for Encrypted Communications

The British public overwhelmingly believe they have the right to private conversations online and broadly oppose allowing law enforcement to access encrypted messages

Today, the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) released nationally representative polling data revealing that a significant majority of the British public oppose or want meaningful constraints on their government’s surveillance powers. Results show the British public are broadly concerned about the security, privacy, and free speech consequences of allowing law enforcement to access encrypted communications.

The polling data reveals that the British public generally believe the government should not be able to order a technology company to provide access to all their users’ information in order to investigate potential crimes (33%), or that such orders should at least be subject to some form of public disclosure or parliamentary oversight (41%). Only a small minority believe the government should be able to secretly issue such orders and prohibit technology companies from notifying the public when they receive them (12%).

These findings are particularly interesting in light of an ongoing fight between the UK government and Apple over government surveillance powers. In the UK, the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 allows law enforcement to gain access to encrypted communications by issuing Technical Capability Notices (TCNs) — secret orders that can compel tech companies to build mechanisms allowing government access to their users’ communications. In July 2026, Apple challenged the government’s ability to issue such orders at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The move came after the company withdrew its Advanced Data Protection Service from the UK in January 2025, in response to a secret government TCN requiring Apple to provide backdoor access to encrypted iCloud data. The government dropped its initial demand last year, but reportedly issued a fresh TCN covering only British users.

Broadly, the polling data also showed that:

• A majority of the British public believe the security risks to the public of allowing law enforcement to access encrypted messages at any time outweigh the benefits to law enforcement, compared to a minority who believe the benefits to law enforcement outweigh the security risks (53-28%).
• • The British public are overwhelmingly concerned that allowing law enforcement to access encrypted messages without user knowledge or prior court approval could open vulnerabilities that make it easier for hackers and criminals to access personal data — potentially increasing fraud, data leaks, and cybercrime (84%).
• Nearly three-quarters are concerned that such access could discourage free speech or open communication across the country (73%). And many of the British public say they would change their own behaviour if law enforcement had access to their encrypted messages without prior court approval:
  • 65% would be more cautious about what they like, share, or comment on.
  • 43% would separate their online identity from their real identity.
  • 41% would self-censor or refrain from being critical of public institutions or officials.
• When the government issued a TCN to Apple requiring backdoor access to encrypted iCloud data, and prohibited Apple from disclosing the order, most of the British public (55%) were unaware it had happened at all.

“Our research shows that the British public have strong feelings about the privacy of their online conversations, and government efforts to undermine that privacy are badly out of step with public opinion,” said Tom Bowman, Policy Counsel for Security and Surveillance at the Center for Democracy & Technology, who led the polling project. “A remarkable number said they’d change how they express themselves online if law enforcement could silently read their private messages. Clearly, the British public aren’t keen on the idea of the government reading over their shoulders.”

“The British public instinctively know that being able to communicate privately is crucial to our individuality and to the survival of a free and open society,” said Jim Killock, Executive Director of Open Rights Group. “The government persists with the myth that it can weaken encryption to target the bad guys only. Attacks on the security of our phones, security tools and messaging apps harm us all and make our democracy weaker.”

“93 per cent of the British public say they have a right to private conversations online, and two-thirds do not trust any government, current or future, with the power to read their encrypted messages,” said Alan Woodward, Visiting Professor, Surrey Centre for Cyber Security, University of Surrey. “Encryption keeps our bank details, medical records and family conversations safe. It cannot be weakened for criminals without being weakened for everyone. Private communication is not a luxury. It is a condition of a thriving democracy.”

“At a time when the government is expanding surveillance powers under the guise of public safety, what stands out from this research is the gap between what we’re told the British public think and what they actually believe,” said Ellie McDonald, Policy and Advocacy Lead at Global Partners Digital. “Strikingly, two-thirds of the British public agree there are better ways to tackle serious crimes than accessing encrypted messages. As today’s polling suggests, spying on people and keeping them safe are not the same thing.”

“There are very few topics where we see the public this united. 93 per cent of British adults say they have a right to private conversations online, and a majority of voters across parties say they do not trust this government, or a future one, with the power to access their encrypted messages,” said Carly Munnelly, Director at Public First. “The public are not naive about online crime, but Green, Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrats, and Reform voters alike simply do not accept that accessing everyone’s private messages is the way to stop it.”

CDT’s research, conducted by Public First, is based on a nationally representative survey conducted among a demographically representative sample of 2,000 British adults 18 years of age and older. The fieldwork took place from April 20–27, 2026. The margin of error for these results is +/- 2.2%, though this differs for smaller sample sizes within the demographic crossbreaks.

The full text of the summary brief and related materials are available on CDT’s website.

###

The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) is the leading nonpartisan, nonprofit organization fighting to advance civil rights and civil liberties in the digital age. We shape technology policy, governance, and design with a focus on equity and democratic values. Established in 1994, CDT has been a trusted advocate for digital rights since the earliest days of the internet. The organization is headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has a Europe Office in Brussels, Belgium.