Related but slightly off-topic: am I the only one that thinks more technology is not the answer to catching crooks? Can’t the police do good old fashioned police work to catch people doing these things? Why does EVERYONE need to be surveilled for the 0.01% (or less?) who don’t behave properly. To further this point: why do we need cameras on every street, facial recognition systems and 3-letter orgs storing huge data…
An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
121–130 of 451 posts
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#122This letter doesn't really read correctly. If you're going to write an open letter, this might be better worded. >Apple's proposed technology works by continuously monitoring photos saved or shared on the user's iPhone, iPad, or Mac. It does a check if it's being uploaded to iCloud Photos. It is not (currently, at least) continuously monitoring photos saved or shared; shared is Messages specific for child accounts. >…
As you say, it’s important to be precise, otherwise people won’t take your arguments seriously. To summarise:
One system involves hash checking. This is performed when photos are being uploaded to iCloud. The hashes are calculated on-device. Private set intersection is used to determine whether the photos being uploaded match anything in the CSAM hash list. Photos that match will be reviewed manually - if I recall correctly, this only occurs after a certain threshold has been reached. This system will only match known CSAM (or whatever else is in the hash list).
The second, independent, system, is a machine learning model which runs on-device to detect sexually explicit photos being received on Messages.app. This system is designed to be run on children’s phones. The system will hide these explicit images by default, and can be configured to alert parents - that feature is designed for under-13s. This system doesn’t use the CSAM hash list.
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#123Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#124Honestly I'm glad to see a non-insignificant amount of people in tech take this seriously, especially when the goal Apple announces appears to be for the greater good. It can be hard to stand on the side that doesn't immediately appear to be correct. We have already lost so many freedoms for 'national security' and other such blanket terminology. Just be warned, there will be those that unfairly try to cast this as h…
Makes you wonder how many pedophiles there is in tech.
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considered, sure. But easily rejected. Let’s be grownups here.
Yes, indeed, let's! Grownups recognize that strip searches are unwarranted in this and most other cases, be they physical OR digital... And certainly you've heard of software bugs. You do not think that a small one like "accidentally" "forgetting" to check that a photo had been synced cannot happen, and an "accidental" scan of ALL photos couldn't possibly happen in any situation no matter what bug/corruption/etc? Sur…
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google does the same with Google Drive. Apple is just late for the party.
Apple does the same with iCloud as Google does with Google Drive. Apple just now moved it to scan on the device.
And if you have your iCloud sync toggle on, since your devices are intended to be uploaded, the client is doing the hashing.
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, indeed, let's! Grownups recognize that strip searches are unwarranted in this and most other cases, be they physical OR digital... And certainly you've heard of software bugs. You do not think that a small one like "accidentally" "forgetting" to check that a photo had been synced cannot happen, and an "accidental" scan of ALL photos couldn't possibly happen in any situation no matter what bug/corruption/etc? Sur…
You must surely realise that there’s a fairly large difference between being strip-searched and having a hash computed on one of your photos that you’re uploading to iCloud.
Reference: history of literally every dictatorship includes many "reasonable" expansions of power in the name of security/safety/etc...
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#128Honestly I'm glad to see a non-insignificant amount of people in tech take this seriously, especially when the goal Apple announces appears to be for the greater good. It can be hard to stand on the side that doesn't immediately appear to be correct. We have already lost so many freedoms for 'national security' and other such blanket terminology. Just be warned, there will be those that unfairly try to cast this as h…
> a non-insignificant amount of people in tech take this seriously We're all here to make ourselves feel good saying we Took A Stand. In reality, four weeks from now, do you think anybody will still be talking about it? I made this same mistake. I was pretty convinced that people were taking Copilot seriously, and that there was possibly going to be ramifications for Microsoft. I wasn't particularly looking forward t…
The typical Apple customer is forking over thousands of dollars. They have substantial control. This isn't like a government where you need a plurality of voters to agree before anything starts to happen.
Apple is running software on their phone that will either (a) do nothing or (b) call the police on them. The situation is questionable even for a normal consumer, let alone a nervous one. Maybe most people will weigh up the situation and keep buying Apple. But they are making a choice, they aren't powerless. And some will start asking how important smartphones really are.
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
You must surely realise that there’s a fairly large difference between being strip-searched and having a hash computed on one of your photos that you’re uploading to iCloud.
You must surely realize that slippery slopes exist. And as soon as adversarial code exists in your device, it will only expand. Reference: history of literally every dictatorship includes many "reasonable" expansions of power in the name of security/safety/etc...
The slippery slope from Apple checking image hashes to hourly strip-searches seems rather unlikely, which makes your analogy unhelpful.
Re: An open letter against Apple's new privacy-invasive client-side content scanning
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
The visceral hate here is towards Apple because they are the current subject. Substitute any FAANG, or really, any company behaving similarly, and my reaction would be similar. Was it ever a conversation in the first place? I'm pretty sure that unless there's enough blow-back financially, Apple is going to do whatever it wants. This was never a conversation, it was a dictum from Apple that we're all reacting to. They…
> Was it ever a conversation in the first place? [..] I don't need others to understand my position What do you think the point of Hacker News is?