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

EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 215 posts

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#171

Post by partiallyagree »

LocalH wrote: post #170
simondotau wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a parent, I consider myself the "end user" of my child's device, not my child. That I might be looped in on any messages sent or received by this device is not at all a leak, it's a convenience—much like how I can receive messages sent to me on my phone and my laptop.

It's very creepy that you want to eavesdrop on your child in that way, in my opinion. This is the micro version of governments wanting ubiquitous surveillance.

Partially agree, there was some weirdo on another hackernews thread that monitors their 17 year old daughter's phone and has no plans to stop until Apple remove the right on the 18th birthday. Crazy. That said I think it would be reasonable to check up on your 13 year old to ensure there is no pedophiles messaging etc.. I'd probably draw the line at 14 after having a open chat about risks, peados, impersonation, social engineering etc

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#172

Post by LocalH »

dwaite wrote: post #145
radlad wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a child, my mother refused to buy me any computers. I had to earn money mowing lawns and raking leaves to buy a laptop. Once I had a laptop, she told me she wished there was software she could install on all of her children's computers that would allow her to view what each of us was doing on her TV. I considered that spying - even if it was intentional on her part. I detested how few rights I had as a chi…

> I detested how few rights I had as a child. That is called being a teenager, I think.

Minors deserve no privacy? Is that what you're saying?

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#173

Post by istingray »

simondotau wrote: post #66
GuB-42 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not about the encryption, it is about what an "end" is. Generally, we consider the "end" to be the end user. If someone else can see the message along the way, it is not end to end anymore from a user perspective, even if it is from a network perspective. And Apple has complete control over your device through software updates. So that the leak is from your device or from the network is a mostly meaningless tec…

As a parent, I consider myself the "end user" of my child's device, not my child. That I might be looped in on any messages sent or received by this device is not at all a leak, it's a convenience—much like how I can receive messages sent to me on my phone and my laptop.

The EFF's challenge is when people abuse the system (ie a partner requiring their partner to register as child), or abusive parents.

From the letter: "Moreover, the system Apple has developed assumes that the "parent" and "child" accounts involved actually belong to an adult who is the parent of a child, and that those individuals have a healthy relationship. This may not always be the case; an abusive adult may be the organiser of the account, and the consequences of parental notification could threaten the child’s safety and well being. LGBTQ+ youths on family accounts with unsympathetic parents are particularly at risk."

Should Apple should require verification of parental status? Ie upload birth certificate, photos of parents, child, whatever is necessary to establish true legal guardianship. Still doesn't protect the children from abusive parents though.

These features need to be killed off yesterday.

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#174

Post by istingray »

slownews45 wrote: post #132
GuB-42 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone sends a message to your child, the message is for your child, not for you. Your child is the "end point" and you are an evesdropper. This is a case where I think it is justified, as long as your child is a minor and you are his legal guardian. But as acceptable as it is, you are still a spy and the app is spyware. The fears, justified or not, is that the same feature that can be used for parental control…

The parent paid for the device, don't they then own it? Or can kids sign up for phone plans and buy $1,200 devices these days? Normally, if I buy a device, I want control. If I chose to get alerted to porn being sent to my 10 year old - that should be permitted. I don't care if the sender hasn't given consent, I don't give them consent to send porn or naked photos to my kids !

To protect the children, should Apple should require verification of parental status? Ie upload birth certificate, photos of parents, child, whatever is necessary to establish true legal guardianship.

This surveillance is a huge can of worms. Apple should stay faraway.

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#175

Post by istingray »

anonuser123456 wrote: post #95
carlosdp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (though that could easily be the same even without all these CSAM measures.. not a new threat) Apple has historically avoided being pressured by governments to allow this kind of surveillance by arguing they can't be forced to create functionality that doesn't exist, or hand over information they don't have. It's the argument they made in the San Bernadino case. If they release this, it'll be much harder to avoid g…

Not really. Apple simply tells the DOJ if any non-CSAM content is added surreptitiously to the DB, Apple will drop CSAM scanning. Also, if DOJ makes any request to scan for non CSAM by court order or warrant, Apple will in kind drop support for the technology. Apple is making the good faith effort here. If DOJ makes a bad faith effort, Apple is in now way required to continue to participate.

In this scenario, how would the first criteria be met? "Content is added surreptitiously to the DB"?

From my understanding Apple blindly accepts the list of hashes from their trusted soueces.

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#176

Post by istingray »

azinman2 wrote: post #44
sennight wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What more could one ask for? An independent audit for both the secret secondary perceptual hashing algorithm and the chain of custody policies/compliance for the "US db" and the disconcertedly open ended "not yet chosen non-US db"?

Do you ask for the same audit at Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox, and countless others who are already doing this and have been for years? I do not share your same concern of some abused db _today_.

I don't use those services for this reason. Apple was the last remaining option that didn't do surveillance.

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#177

Post by istingray »

joe_the_user wrote: post #126
hoppyhoppy2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest episode of The Daily podcast [0] from The New York Times said that Apple executives were told by members of Congress at a hearing that if they didn't do something about CSAM on their platform the federal government would force them through legislation. And it's not a completely idle threat; just look at the proposed EARN-IT Act of 2020 [1], which would pretty much outlaw end-to-end encrypted services witho…

Government by threatened legislation is much worse than government by actual legislation. Legislation is public, Legislation can be opposed, legislation can be reviewed by the court and so-forth. Allowing yourself (and your users) to controlled by threats of legislation is allowing democracy to be discarded.

Wow good take. Appreciate this perspective. Let the system do its work!

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#178

Post by istingray »

SCUSKU wrote: post #115
politelemon wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The time to be angry with apple was years ago when they launched their false marketing campaign claiming privacy on their closed devices. A lot of people fell for it, and were happy to believe whatever they said. All the while they have been two-face-timing by turning over user data to governments (including the US and putting user data on Chinese servers) anyway, with the highest data turnover rates actually. Everyo…

What can I, as an individual, do to protect my digital privacy then? Would that mean ditching the Apple ecosystem, and going full linux laptop & phone? As much as I would love to buy a pinephone, they just don't seem like a truly viable alternative...

There's been a few relevant threads on how to switch. I have these two handy since I started them:

Non-surveillance phones: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28164208

Non-surveillance laptops: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28216287

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#179

Post by tekknik »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #162
GuB-42 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone sends a message to your child, the message is for your child, not for you. Your child is the "end point" and you are an evesdropper. This is a case where I think it is justified, as long as your child is a minor and you are his legal guardian. But as acceptable as it is, you are still a spy and the app is spyware. The fears, justified or not, is that the same feature that can be used for parental control…

Im a parent of young ones and I wouldn't want control of my kids' devices or messages. Good parenting is about preparing your kid for the world, not jumping in whenever there is a fire. Frankly I find this attitude very creepy. At what age do you "turn off" access? If you can't handle your kid being online then don't pay for their device or phone plan.

It’s also about building trust and a relationship with your child.

I also think this behavior is creepy and would do it myself. But interestingly it is preparing them for a world in which there really are no secrets anymore.

Re: EFF Joins Global Coalition Asking Apple CEO Tim Cook to Stop Phone-Scanning

#180

Post by istingray »

politelemon wrote: post #74
nullc wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple is performing the searching of user private data due to pressure or incentive from the government it would make apple an agent of the government from the perspective of the fourth amendment. As such, these warrantless searches would be unlawful. If what you suggest were true, we should be even more angry with Apple: it would mean that rather than just lawfully invading their users privacy, that they were a p…

The time to be angry with apple was years ago when they launched their false marketing campaign claiming privacy on their closed devices. A lot of people fell for it, and were happy to believe whatever they said. All the while they have been two-face-timing by turning over user data to governments (including the US and putting user data on Chinese servers) anyway, with the highest data turnover rates actually. Everyo…

I've seen this argument before. Yes, perhaps I could have switched my OS back then.

I don't really buy the implication though. "The time to be angry is years ago"; "We should be angry with ourselves". If these are true, what are you saying? That we should suck it up and be quiet? That we missed our chance and need to deal with it?

Fairly sure this is one of those logical fallacies used on young children who forgot to use the bathroom before a long road trip.

Post reply on HN