Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#531

Post by john_strinlai » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 7:38 PM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #528

john_strinlai wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple reported 250 items Instagram 3.1million whatsapp 1.1 million facebook 8.8million tiktok 1.3 million snapchat 1.1million those numbers seem absolutely in line with what i would expect when comparing the largest social media platforms on the planet and a company that does 0 social media and extremely limited group sharing. it seems very strange to me to put any blame apple here when its just a statistics game.…

Sorry but this is denial. I know I'm not going to change your mind, however: > it seems very strange to me to put any blame apple here when its just a statistics game. billions of image posts = millions of reports. simple as. Apple's platform hosts billions of messages and photos. It is the Paedophile’s choice for distributing images and videos. The problem for us is Apple's halfarsedness in tackling this leads to cl…

>I know I'm not going to change your mind

you might if you could back up statements like "apple is the pedos choice for distributing images and videos" with any sort of data.

but you wont be able to, because it's not true.

and, again, apple is 1:1 transmission. you know who is distributing the CSAM in that case. dont be lazy, go to the actual police.

instagram, facebook, whatsapp is 1:many transmission with strangers. a report button makes a lot of sense there.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#532

Post by izacus » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 8:02 PM UTC

GeekyBear wrote: post #237

izacus wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Photos does ask you for consent when you run it. (It is, granted, a bit pushy about it and will ask multiple times when you run it with an intrusive dialog.)

Informed consent would require Google to inform you that their AI server will scan every photo you take with your device and report you to the police if it should detect (or hallucinate) something it doesn't like.

Now you're just bizarrely moving the goalposts instead of admitting you spread misinformation.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#533

Post by SepiaSapient » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 8:34 PM UTC

johnsmith1840 wrote: post #276

SepiaSapient wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brainfart on my part. I was referring to what @majorchord was worrying about, the unencrypted messages in the client get exfiltrated and get sent to the spooks using steganography on some benign request, edited my comment. My mental model is that most competent intelligence agencies have a PRISM 3.0 deal with FAANG, including on E2E products or at least have devs on the payroll. I imagine that any backdoor is only us…

Yeah Cletus and Chud aren't getting many secrets but I get the feeling Apple's incentives here are against this. What financial gain do they get from this? A: risk billions in stock value and customer purchases for basically a "thanks" from the gov? One whistleblower would also have the real ability of becoming world famous for "exposing" apple. B: Get publicity actually resisting the gov and not lying, what is the g…

For sure, it's arm twisting and/or individual moles, I doubt Apple is brimming with patriotism. As far as I remember participation in the OG PRISM wasn't really optional, the only "perks" were immunity from civil liability. I assume that any of the "lucky" individuals that have to interface with the NSA are well compensated. They also know they are on a veeery short leash.

The other option is good ye old agent cultivation, there must be a degenerate gambler high up in Apple that the MSS or FSB can exploit.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#534

Post by ipsod » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 8:58 PM UTC

throwaway-blaze wrote: post #526

yonaguska wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full auto handguns are quite popular now despite being effectively illegal.

This is simply untrue, there are no full auto handguns legally sold to the public. Semiautomatic yes. And yes, some guns are way too easy to convert to full auto.

"switch" It's really popular among the youth.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#535

Post by nozzlegear » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:37 PM UTC

bigyabai wrote: post #530

nozzlegear wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Apple's interests sometimes align with ours then great. Altruism or not, I've found that their interests almost always align with mine when it comes to privacy.

I've found that Apple's interests are pretty fickle, concerning real-world security: https://www.securityweek.com/apple-suddenly-drops-nso-group-...

> Apple has abruptly withdrawn its lawsuit against NSO Group, citing increased risk that the legal battle might unintentionally reveal sensitive vulnerability data and difficulties in acquiring essential information from the spyware vendor.

> In a court filing Friday, Apple said continuing the lawsuit now poses “too significant a risk” of exposing the anti-exploitation and threat intelligence efforts needed to fend off the very adversaries involved in the legal dispute.

> “When it filed this lawsuit nearly three years ago, Apple recognized that it would involve sharing information with third parties. However, developments since then have reshaped the risk landscape associated with sharing such information,” the Cupertino device maker said.

I mean, iOS has never been open source so Apple has always practiced security through obscurity. It doesn't seem unreasonable that they'd be concerned about this. Idk, seems like a nothingburger but maybe I'm wrong.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#536

Post by giantg2 » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #522

giantg2 wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we want to compare cities to New Orleans, then you might as well compare them them to Birmingham. Even with firearms being banned you have a murder rate of 28/100k vs 40/100k. Violent crime between the cities is actually equal at 55/1k. Yeah, stabbing deaths UK vs US is about half (175/70M UK vs 1600/350M US). But if comparing at the national level, 360/100k US vs 1200/100k UK. So it really comes down to each pers…

> 360/100k US vs 1200/100k UK. Sorry but 1200 knife deaths per 100k means the annual rate would be 840,000 murders a year. last year the total number of murders in the UK was ~600 which is .86 per 100k (far less than the _gun_ related homicides in the US: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/04/28/what-the-... ) The reason why I was talking about knife homicides specifically is that comparing knife crime betw…

"360/100k US vs 1200/100k UK"

That's the violent crime rate.

I do see the 28 was an error.

Yes, lower murder rate, but higher violent crime rate.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#537

Post by bigyabai » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:53 PM UTC

nozzlegear wrote: post #535

bigyabai wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that Apple's interests are pretty fickle, concerning real-world security: https://www.securityweek.com/apple-suddenly-drops-nso-group-...

> Apple has abruptly withdrawn its lawsuit against NSO Group, citing increased risk that the legal battle might unintentionally reveal sensitive vulnerability data and difficulties in acquiring essential information from the spyware vendor. > In a court filing Friday, Apple said continuing the lawsuit now poses “too significant a risk” of exposing the anti-exploitation and threat intelligence efforts needed to fend o…

https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1307138-we-did-it-patrick-we...

Dropping the case is great for Apple's obscurity, but terrible for enforcing the security of iOS users that are still vulnerable to Pegasus malware. Now NSO Group is not threatened or deterred, which is the worst of all worlds for iOS security.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#538

Post by rationalist » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 11:07 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #481

godwinson__4-8 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me which part of your brain is engaged when you converse with your imaginary friend? Is that really the best reply you could conjure? Maybe you can produce some evidence absolving the Catholic Church here? Or are you also an apologist for institutions that call themselves sacred engaging in systemic sex abuse?

While I am as anti religious as you, probably not the best discussion method. Instead ask them if their church ever taught them anything on how to prevent sexual abuse, in both children or adults. Quickly you'll find the apologist for the church saying it's not the churches job even though they are in charge of children and vulnerable adults almost all the time.

FWIW, the Catholic Church and the other Church I go to, both require training on how to prevent abuse, sexual and otherwise, towards children, if you're in a ministry that works with children. That's why their rates of abuse are lower than other institutions such as schools.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#539

Post by seanmcdirmid » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 12:10 AM UTC

brabel wrote: post #409

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CSAM laws in many jurisdictions include computer generated or hand crafted media that do not pre-require CSA at all. The idea is that deviance leads to CSA, and by cracking down on CSAM, we are preventing CSA.

This is such a slippery slope. It amounts to thought police. You did not actually cause any harm, but thought of doing something. Where do we stop ? If I fantasize about my pretty coworker without her consent, am I a rapist now? What if I make a sketch of her naked? Is that a crime? What if I ask AI to remove her clothes from a real picture? Even if I just immediately delete it?? I guess that there’s different levels…

I don’t agree or disagree. It is political suicide however, to argue for saner laws in this area even if you think that the current ones aren’t sane.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#540

Post by inigyou » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 2:17 AM UTC

WarmWash wrote: post #498

inigyou wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, alongside "Congress shall make no law" which says it's fine for anyone who isn't Congress to infringe your free speech, or for Congress to do it in any way that isn't making a law.

The system does not work like that, hah. This is the kind of logic sovereign citizens use..."I'm traveling, not driving, so I don't need a license!" At the end of the day, judges have the ability to clear away silly logic like that, it's part of their job.

Yes, judges have the power to say the constitution is just toilet paper. That's why the constitution is currently just toilet paper. Including both the first and second amendments.