Apple, as exemplified by their long running battle with the FBI, are serious both about the security of their devices and their owners. 

In the aftermath of the FBI dispute, which saw Apple refuse to provide a 'back door' through which the FBI could gain access to the iPhone 5C used by one of the terrorists involved in the San Bernardino terrorist attack in California in 2015, it appears Apple has moved to ramp up its encryption methods.

Now, keen to improve the security of its devices even further, according to the Reuters news agency Apple have rehired renowned security expert Jon Callas. 

The respected software engineer is known for co-founding services dealing with encrypted communications, such as PGP Corporation, Silent Circle and Blackphone.

After it was reported that professional hackers helped the FBI to gain access to the iPhone 5C at the centre of the dispute, it appears that Apple is now determined to create defences for its products that even the FBI can't compromise.

Reuters believe that Callas is firmly behind Apple in their position to organisations being obligated to circumnavigate their encryption by the authorities. It is believed that Callas's previous work for Apple centred around the OS X and iOS cryptographic security products.

In related developments, the home secretary of the United Kingdom, Theresa May, has been involved in making concessions relating to the so called 'snooper's charter', which was created to tackle privacy issues in the UK. A House of Commons debate is expected over the charter next week, and May has made the concessions as a direct response in reaction to concerns that were brought up by the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC), specifically that mass surveillance powers which could be introduced are not permitted in scenarios where methods which are less intrusive could be an alternative.

Rights groups such as Don’t Spy On Us have made a co-ordinated outcry against the measures of the investigatory powers bill, even going as far as to conduct an advertising campaign featuring Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin and North Korean supremo Kim Jong-un and comparing Britain's policies to those that are in force in the two notoriously 'snoopy' countries. 

Extra attention on the investigatory powers bill is expected in the run-up to the UK's EU referendum, which will take place directly after the two-day report stage in the House of Commons. 

Media organisations in the UK could also welcome May's concessions, as they accommodate further protection for investigative journalists. The power of the press is held in high regard in the UK, with journalists given rights to look into cases they believe could be in the public interest under so called "whistleblower laws".

A spokesperson for the Home Office explained in a statement: “We have always been clear that we will listen to the constructive views of politicians from all sides of the House to ensure the passage of this important bill. We have said the government will be bringing forward amendments at report stage and are willing to consider amendments that are in the interest of both improving the bill and of demonstrating the necessity of the powers it contains.”

On the other side of the house, perhaps predictably the Liberal Democrats attacked May on her formulation of the bill, pointing out that she has ignored some important elements on privacy. The Liberal Democrat spokesman on public affairs, Alistair Carmichael, told the Guardian newspaper: “Theresa May’s concession allowing for an independent review into bulk powers is welcome but this goes nowhere near far enough. Too many of the proposals in the bill are vaguely drafted and disproportionate; for example, we are clear that proposals to collect and store everyone’s web histories for 12 months has to go. We should be equipping our police and security services with the resources they need, not drowning them in data."

May was an early supporter of the FBI and Obama administration's stance on privacy, expressing her views back in February that encryption should not interfere with the work of governments. She cited national security and safety as the two priorities and dismissed Apple's view that the privacy of its users is paramount.

If the bill is passed in the UK it would mean that unlike in the US, the UK government would be able to use bulk hacking powers to access the devices of users under special circumstances. 

One intriguing element of the Apple vs FBI saga is that some of Apple's rival companies, manufacturers of Android phones, supported their stance as they too are worried by the ramifications that would affect their customers should a government be given the go ahead to hack into devices. Their worries are perhaps more pertinent, as Android devices have no unique form of security defence and encryption chips are added at the discretion of the particular manufacturer.