181–190 of 269 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People have been using password protected archives to get around pirated content restrictions since forever.
Does Google even have to look at the content? I assume most pirated content will also have a massive number of anonymous downloads, and shouldn't that trigger some fair-usage clause somewhere ?
Meaning Google has access to all of the files stored on Google Drive, including and not limited to: - your business secrets - GDPR data that you legitimately have This is exactly why I do not use Google Drive for anything business critical.
When google said they were no longer giving way free storage I bought the cheapest 100GB google one plan for $20/yr. Last night I saw the renewal email and cancelled it. After nearly 10 years of Google usage including drive, email, and pictures (I rarely take videos) I have only ~30GB. Almost 15GB of that is in drive which is a simple "my docks" kind of backup and dumping ground. I'm moving my drive stuff to a cheap…
You might still want to backup to a different location, given VPS's aren't immune to data loss. rclone with encryption works and ensures you are the only one with access to your data. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/technology/amazon-aws-... https://www.techzine.eu/news/infrastructure/57005/ovh-share-...
I believe this may be due to the popular spamming method lately which is tagging people into a Google Docs and share it so everyone receives a notification (the spam message). It works better than regular email spam since apparently Gmail doesn't treat Google Docs notification email as spam (at least not as often).
there is also a method for sharing pirated media using google drive. TBH I'm surprised they havent started earlier
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are spreading misinformation. I don’t know if on purpose or ignorance. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/child-sexual-abuse-scans-apple-... They were very much planning to scan all photos on the device independent of iCloud. It was going to be another phase of the rollout. It was going to be in iOS 15.x and they backpedaled.
I think that's just imprecision on the part of noted tech news outlet CBS. Apple clearly documented that this was only for iCloud uploaded photos, and indeed the technical description makes clear that this is only designed to work with uploaded photos: https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni... .
Not sure why they would need to do that. It does open up your phone for scanning and uses beyond what they initially layout.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Apple's CSAM would scan your offline photos. Apple's plan was to to scan photos that you uploaded to iCloud, only. Even that plan was canceled. Google, however, still does scan everything in your account and has been doing so for the past decade. For instance, this article from 2014: >a man [was] arrested on child pornography charges, after Google tipped off authorities about illegal images found in the Houston susp…
As does Dropbox, Aol, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook, etc, etc. Whether this is good or bad is a topic for fair debate, I think, but it continues to astound me both how little people are aware of this and that, in comparison, Apple's relatively privacy-preserving approach generated so much flak.
And you still need to scan local photos on the phone?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's just imprecision on the part of noted tech news outlet CBS. Apple clearly documented that this was only for iCloud uploaded photos, and indeed the technical description makes clear that this is only designed to work with uploaded photos: https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni... .
Apple clearly said they scan the photos on your phone not in your cloud account. They say it is designed to work with iCloud photos and they are processed / scanned on your photo before they are uploaded to the cloud. Not sure why they would need to do that. It does open up your phone for scanning and uses beyond what they initially layout.
The whole point of the protocol (as described in the Apple whitepaper) is to allow clients to attest to perceptual hash matches without the server having access to the plaintext.
So, the irony of all of this is that the Apple design is effectively more private than the status quo, but everyone freaks out about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty email providers out there. Free and paid. It should not be a problem for anyone to switch. Moving off of Gmail doesn't mean to self host. It is a bit of work to tell anyone about your new address, but that's it.
What about the hundreds of other accounts that use your gmail as either the 2FA target or password reset? For a non-technical user (like my mom), this is a herculean task.
I believe this may be due to the popular spamming method lately which is tagging people into a Google Docs and share it so everyone receives a notification (the spam message). It works better than regular email spam since apparently Gmail doesn't treat Google Docs notification email as spam (at least not as often).
> When it’s restricted, you may see a flag next to the filename, you won’t be able to share it, and your file will no longer be publicly accessible
So it's probably a combination of things, including piracy. They're not forbidding people from storing or retrieving the files, just not allowing anyone to publicly host whatever they want on Google's servers. Seems reasonable.