Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 465 posts

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#131

Post by jowsie »

lixtra wrote: post #125
helen___keller wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just don't understand how they acted this way at all. There's a simple answer to this right? Despite everyone's reaction, Apple genuinely believe this is a novel and unique method to catch CSAM without invading people's privacy. And if you look at it from Apple's point of view that's correct: other major cloud providers catch CSAM content on their platform by inspecting every file uploaded, i.e. total invasion of…

> other major cloud providers catch CSAM content on their platform by inspecting every file uploaded That is very unlikely. Most likely they compare some hash against a database - just like apple.

That's what they're saying, the key difference is Apples happens on your device, not theirs.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#132

Post by kzrdude »

duxup wrote: post #116
epistasis wrote: post #42

What's shocking to me is how little Apple management understood of what their actions looked like. Really stunning. For a company that marketed itself as one of the few digital service providers that consumers could trust, I just don't understand how they acted this way at all. Either there will be heads rolling at management, or Apple takes a permanent hit to consumer trust.

I'm kinda amazed. I mentioned I was thinking of moving from an Android phone to Apple soon, somewhat privacy related. My friends lectured me on "they're scanning your photos" ... meanwhile they share their google photos albums with me and marvel about how easy they are to search ... Maybe we (humans) only get outraged based on more specific narratives and not so much the general topics / issues? I don't know but they…

Isn't there a small difference between these? A) They scan everything I have released to google photos B) They scan everything that exists on my device

Psychologically, you'll feel a difference in what you accept between the two, I think

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#133

Post by petersellers »

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #123
petersellers wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two different "features" being implemented - Messages scanning for minors on a family plan (which can be turned off) and iCloud Photo scanning (which can't be turned off, as far as I know). So no, you can't just turn it off.

Yes, it can be turned off. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/05/apple-csam-detection-di...

Only if you disable iCloud photos completely. So no, you cannot turn off the feature unless you stop using iCloud photos.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#134

Post by GeekyBear »

OnlineGladiator wrote: post #118
GeekyBear wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that's shocking to me is that Google, Microsoft and all the big names in tech have been scanning everything in your account (email, cloud drive, photos, etc) for the past decade, without any noticeable uproar. Apple announces that it is going to start scanning iCloud Photos only, and that their system is set to ignore anything below a threshold of ~30 positives before triggering a human review, and people l…

The other companies didn't advertise and pride themselves on being privacy focused. Part of the appeal of Apple was that you could avoid that issue and they touted it regularly. Now they're telling their customers to go fuck themselves (so long as they're 18 or older).

Conducting the scan on the user's device instead of on the companies server is more private.

Apple can't decrypt the results of the scan until the ~30 image threshold is crossed and a human review is triggered.

Given Google's reluctance to hire humans when a poorly performing algorithm is cheaper, are they turning over every single false positive without a human review?

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#135

Post by arsome »

bobthepanda wrote: post #128
heavyset_go wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a common deflection, but get back to me when either company puts programs in my pocket that scan my data for crimes and snitch on me to authorities.

At least Google does. https://protectingchildren.google/intl/en/ > CSAI Match is our proprietary technology, developed by the YouTube team, for combating child sexual abuse imagery (CSAI) in video content online. It was the first technology to use hash-matching to identify known violative videos and allows us to identify this type of violative content amid a high volume of non-violative video content. When a match of…

Note that they're not pushing it to devices that consumers have purchased, just running it on their cloud services. I think it's an important distinction here with what Apple is doing.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#136

Post by heavyset_go »

bobthepanda wrote: post #128
heavyset_go wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a common deflection, but get back to me when either company puts programs in my pocket that scan my data for crimes and snitch on me to authorities.

At least Google does. https://protectingchildren.google/intl/en/ > CSAI Match is our proprietary technology, developed by the YouTube team, for combating child sexual abuse imagery (CSAI) in video content online. It was the first technology to use hash-matching to identify known violative videos and allows us to identify this type of violative content amid a high volume of non-violative video content. When a match of…

No, that happens on Google's servers and isn't an agent in my pocket that runs on and invades my personal property. It's also only for videos.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#137

Post by whoknowswhat11 »

epistasis wrote: post #42

What's shocking to me is how little Apple management understood of what their actions looked like. Really stunning. For a company that marketed itself as one of the few digital service providers that consumers could trust, I just don't understand how they acted this way at all. Either there will be heads rolling at management, or Apple takes a permanent hit to consumer trust.

We will see. I've heard lots of these predictions and I don't buy them AT ALL.

What I have seen is a selling point for apple products.

I'd encourage folks to get out of the HN bubble on this - talk to a wife, a family especially those with kids.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#138

Post by petersellers »

endisneigh wrote: post #126
petersellers wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two different "features" being implemented - Messages scanning for minors on a family plan (which can be turned off) and iCloud Photo scanning (which can't be turned off, as far as I know). So no, you can't just turn it off.

But you can tho…

Please show evidence where the feature can be turned off (without having to completely disable iCloud photos).

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#139

Post by mschuster91 »

helen___keller wrote: post #97
epistasis wrote: post #42

What's shocking to me is how little Apple management understood of what their actions looked like. Really stunning. For a company that marketed itself as one of the few digital service providers that consumers could trust, I just don't understand how they acted this way at all. Either there will be heads rolling at management, or Apple takes a permanent hit to consumer trust.

> I just don't understand how they acted this way at all. There's a simple answer to this right? Despite everyone's reaction, Apple genuinely believe this is a novel and unique method to catch CSAM without invading people's privacy. And if you look at it from Apple's point of view that's correct: other major cloud providers catch CSAM content on their platform by inspecting every file uploaded, i.e. total invasion of…

> Apple found a way to preserve that privacy but still catch the bad people doing very bad things to children.

They're not going to find predators, all they are going to find is people incompetent enough to have years old (otherwise how would it end up at NCMEC?) CSAM on their iPhones and dumb enough to have iCloud backup turned on. To catch actual predators they would need to run AI scanning on phones for all photos and risk a lot of false positives by parents taking photos of their children on a beach.

Plus a load of people who will inadvertently have stuff that "looks" like CSAM on their devices because some 4chan trolls will inevitably create colliding material and spread it in ads etc. so it ends up downloaded in browser caches.

All of this "let's use technology to counter pedos" is utter, utter crap that is not going to save one single child and will only serve to tear down our freedoms, one law at a time. Want to fight against pedos? Make photos of your airbnb, hotel and motel rooms to help identify abuse recording locations and timeframes, and teach children from an early age about their bodies, sexuality and consent so that they actually have the words to tell you that they are being molested.

Re: Apple defends anti-child abuse imagery tech after claims of ‘hash collisions’

#140

Post by GiorgioG »

jowsie wrote: post #131
lixtra wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> other major cloud providers catch CSAM content on their platform by inspecting every file uploaded That is very unlikely. Most likely they compare some hash against a database - just like apple.

That's what they're saying, the key difference is Apples happens on your device, not theirs.

That's not really better or different. In any meaningful way.
Post reply on HN