Apple’s new abuse prevention system: an antritust/competition point of view

Post by DSingularity » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 2:07 PM UTC

Zababa wrote: post #212

DSingularity wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion I thought we were having was about false positives and not adversarially induced false positives. For the former the random collisions have a probability of 1/(2^64). To mitigate adversarial false positives one idea is to use the combination of a cryptographically strong hash along with a randomly selected perturbation of the file. Prior to hashing, perturb the file and submit both the hash and the sel…

I thought that the random collision for md5 was way higher than that. If it's that low, you're right, this would work. I'm not sure I understand the part about the pertubation.

Post by gonehome » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

ComputerGuru wrote: post #223

gonehome wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "As mentioned in the article, this does absolutely nothing towards protecting children other than directing all but the biggest idiots towards platforms that can't be linked to them, which I'd imagine, they already are." I suspect you're more wrong than you think about this. People share large volumes of CSAM through lots of different services - I knew someone who worked on the problem at Linked In (!). HN likes to…

You need to stop assuming everyone is commenting out of ignorance and read up on how perceptual hashing works. It’s about as far as you can get from zero false positives, if configured otherwise it becomes just a poor version of SHA or whatever and can only detect exact matches.

Post by birdyrooster » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 2:45 PM UTC

u10 wrote: post #47

cblconfederate wrote: post #15

Apple will release this in their desktop pcs. The major consequence of this is that, a year down the line, microsoft will also be compelled/forced to join this "coalition of the good". After all, they already scan all your files for viruses, it would be a shame if they didn't scan for anything that is deemed incriminating and also call the cops on you. Of course, the children are being used as a trojan horse again. W…

> possessing CP to automatically considering them a child molester, yet someone posessing an action movie is not considered a murderer That's specious reasoning. Someone who posesses an action movie likes action movies, while someone who posesses child porn likes child porn. One is ok, the other is pretty vile and illegal for a reason. I don't agree with Apple on this but let's be clear on what is and what isn't

Post by maximus-decimus » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

u10 wrote: post #47

cblconfederate wrote: post #15

Apple will release this in their desktop pcs. The major consequence of this is that, a year down the line, microsoft will also be compelled/forced to join this "coalition of the good". After all, they already scan all your files for viruses, it would be a shame if they didn't scan for anything that is deemed incriminating and also call the cops on you. Of course, the children are being used as a trojan horse again. W…

> possessing CP to automatically considering them a child molester, yet someone posessing an action movie is not considered a murderer That's specious reasoning. Someone who posesses an action movie likes action movies, while someone who posesses child porn likes child porn. One is ok, the other is pretty vile and illegal for a reason. I don't agree with Apple on this but let's be clear on what is and what isn't

Post by PhasmaFelis » Sat, Aug 07, 2021, 4:24 PM UTC

jeltz wrote: post #248

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't even mention the giant logical leap from finding someone possessing CP to automatically considering them a child molester, yet someone posessing an action movie is not considered a murderer. Filming an action movie does not require actually murdering people.

And neither does producing child porn. Drawn child porn is banned in most countries.