In internal memo, Apple addresses concerns around new Photo scanning features

Post by whall6 » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 4:53 AM UTC

ASalazarMX wrote: post #58

Someone1234 wrote: post #38

Apple's mistake is that they seemingly believe there is pushback because people misunderstand how it works. The reality is more nuanced: People understand exactly how it works, and how it works is that it is turn-key onboard spyware, that Apple pinky-swears isn't being used wrong today . For example if the scope/mission expands (e.g. foreign governments), suddenly you've created a drag-net for whatever "badness" is o…

Sometimes the slippery slope is not a fallacy, but the natural consequence of seeking more control. This feature can be horribly misused in the future, for example, to find people who have sent/received/downloaded Tiannanmen pictures, because instant messaging pictures can be automatically added to your albums. You can't trust a feature whose only impediment from being abused in the future is such pinky promise.

Post by casefields » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 4:55 AM UTC

wslh wrote: post #29

Imagine an attack where bots send suspicious photos to every phone in the planet.

Post by opinion-is-bad » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 4:56 AM UTC

Post by strogonoff » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 4:59 AM UTC

pseudalopex wrote: post #68

strogonoff wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you learn the same thing—that E2E encryption doesn’t need to be broken for this to work? The only event in which Apple can gain access to your content is if you happen to have multiple CSAM matches; then they can access only the matching content, and only then if it’s manually confirmed by a human to be CSAM an action is taken. The issue is if this type of matching is done for other purposes than CSAM; and unfort…

I didn't say anything about breaking E2E encryption. Anything a human in the middle can review in any event isn't E2E encrypted. Call it something else. The issue is the hash algorithm is secret. The decryption threshold is secret. The database of forbidden content can't be audited. People claim it includes entirely legal images. And it's a small step from scanning local only files.

Post by midev » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 5:01 AM UTC

eurasiantiger wrote: post #89

ASalazarMX wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes the slippery slope is not a fallacy, but the natural consequence of seeking more control. This feature can be horribly misused in the future, for example, to find people who have sent/received/downloaded Tiannanmen pictures, because instant messaging pictures can be automatically added to your albums. You can't trust a feature whose only impediment from being abused in the future is such pinky promise.

Add hashes of police uniforms and now you cannot take pictures of law enforcement. Add hashes of politicians. Businessmen in suits. Army uniforms. At the end you have a weapon that can only shoot civilians.