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

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#151

Post by GeekyBear » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:40 PM UTC

avidiax wrote: post #14

amazingamazing wrote: post #4

It is crazy people think apple isnt on the side of privacy. Are they perfect? Not even close, but compared to the rest of big tech theyre simply on another level. Apple could easily not do this stuff and it may even be easier to not.

> It is crazy people think apple isnt on the side of privacy. > It also ensured pressure from governments and plaintiffs, including CSAM victims, who preferred Apple’s more interventionist approaches, which Apple had voluntarily demonstrated it was willing to do. I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning. It proved that it was technically feasible, and was "privacy preserving". I use scare qu…

> I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning.

That box has been open for years now.

Big brother is already watching what you do on your Android device.

> A Dad Took Photos of His Naked Toddler for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveil...

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#152

Post by cataphract » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:40 PM UTC

goalieca wrote: post #71

djoldman wrote: post #51

I am not a lawyer. There is something ironic about US laws that attempt to prevent crime A by outlawing action B. For example: * A: physical sexual abuse of children. B: possession or distribution of CSAM * A: drug trafficking or tax evasion. B: structured cash withdrawals The irony is that the more B is prevented, the less A can be detected and the less B can be used as evidence of A. It's my understanding that conv…

Our society is pretty aligned that distribution is another kind of harm. Non-consented distribution of sexual images (eg: revenge porn) is also a crime. Children don’t need to be the ones to press charges in child porn unlike with adults. That’s a good thing.

It surely is, but that doesn't change the fact that many cases are not about distribution and the harm is frequently more of a legal fiction, unless by harm you mean something other than suffering inflicted on the victims. I don't necessarily think it's wrong for society to ban certain acts on purely moral grounds (another example: incest between siblings), but let's not pretend it's something else going on.

> Non-consented distribution of sexual images (eg: revenge porn) is also a crime.

There is very compelling empirical evidence that this causes actual harm (suicide ideation in a very big fraction of the victims), even if it is fictional, so here there is no question about the harm.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#153

Post by mannanj » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:41 PM UTC

kowbell wrote: post #137

drnick1 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world where the operating system on my phone (GrapheneOS) isn't conspiring against me or uploading my files to someone else's computer.

Is your phone also made of indestructible materials so it can't break, and magnetically linked to your person so it can't be stolen? Backups exist so you don't lose precious photos/data if you lose the device. Most People™ do not have the technical knowledge to set up a self-owned backup system, and/or will not realize how badly their future selves will wish they had backups if the setup friction for a self-owned sol…

I think we are closing that gap with AI coding tools.

A growing number of people people today can figure out how to run Fable in a co work session, or codex, and that can indeed set up the self-owned backup system for you along with an alternative trustable cloud backup thats not Apple or Google.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#154

Post by trvz » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:49 PM UTC

GeekyBear wrote: post #151

avidiax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is crazy people think apple isnt on the side of privacy. > It also ensured pressure from governments and plaintiffs, including CSAM victims, who preferred Apple’s more interventionist approaches, which Apple had voluntarily demonstrated it was willing to do. I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning. It proved that it was technically feasible, and was "privacy preserving". I use scare qu…

> I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning. That box has been open for years now. Big brother is already watching what you do on your Android device. > A Dad Took Photos of His Naked Toddler for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveil...

Google is not Apple. Apple customers expect the higher standard.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#155

Post by GuB-42 » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:51 PM UTC

drnick1 wrote: post #64

slashdave wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people don't need cloud backups What world do you live in?

The world where the operating system on my phone (GrapheneOS) isn't conspiring against me or uploading my files to someone else's computer.

But you still need backups right?

For most people "the cloud" is where you backup stuff. If you have a personal backup strategy that doesn't involve the cloud, you are not "most people".

Doing backups the right way take some skill and investment if you want to do it by yourself. It may involve setting up a NAS, and some discipline with physical media. You have to do your own security too. Most people don't want to do that, so, cloud backup it is.

It is not a perfect solution, even beyond the privacy considerations, like you can still lose your data by losing your account, but from my personal experience, people lose their data less often now that they have cloud backups.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#156

Post by mothballed » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:53 PM UTC

nylonstrung wrote: post #132

xphos wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine you have pictures of someones baptism and the kid was nude. Is it CSAM? I think the program would have to say use but morally I'd say no. The issue with client scanning is it has to assume the worst, or they are than liable. If its the person has 20+ different baptism of nude babys well huh that actually might be CSAM because the context of how that concentrated photos implies but even than its hard what if t…

> America actually produces less CSAM in general because Americans are lot more off put by Sex than most other cultures The US has the largest pornography industry in the world by a massive margin, and the largest consumption of online pornography per capita Meanwhile should we be surprised that CSAM production is higher in countries like the Philippines that have very weak digital policing, abject poverty, high numb…

The age of consent in the PI was like 14 until a couple years ago when they changed it to roughly match international norms, in their culture it was considered consensual rather than abuse until very recently.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#157

Post by ButlerianJihad » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:58 PM UTC

MichaelDickens wrote: post #114

IncreasePosts wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the argument that CSAM can act as a gateway leading people from just being a pedophile in their head, to going out and doing something to some child.

Yes, this is an argument that exists. But it's not supported by evidence. It's the same as the old "video game violence should be outlawed because it might cause real violence", which is just as unsubstantiated.

Yeah, that old canard is ridiculous!

I mean, if there were any truth to it, surely our nation would have seen an uptick, in the past 30–40 years, of new generations picking up guns and just mercilessly mowing down soft targets as if playing GTA.

Thankfully, that is all confined to fantasy in cyberspace!

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#158

Post by giancarlostoro » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 5:58 PM UTC

layer8 wrote: post #43

al_borland wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children are often used as a weapon to erode freedoms, like privacy and speech. Those pushing it rarely actually care about the children.

While I’m decidedly pro-encryption, I don’t like this argument. If something is the right thing, it would still be the right thing when promoted for the wrong reasons, and if it’s the wrong thing, it’s still the wrong thing even when at present nobody has ulterior motives. When arguing against surveillance, the arguments should be on its merits, not on whether the current proponents happen to have ulterior motives.

> not on whether the current proponents happen to have ulterior motives.

Even if the current proponents have no ulterior motive, and in fact live and die having done nothing negative with such power, it does not stop the next group in power from extending and abusing power, don't base laws on temporary trust of politicians.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#159

Post by mothballed » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 6:01 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #92

busterarm wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, in the sense that your therapist is still required to report you to the police in various situations where you pose an immediate threat to yourself or others, etc. And therapists are legally mandated to report you if you told them you viewed or possessed CSAM.

No matter how or why? That seems like a terrible mandate.

They are mandated to report child abuse. It is the same story with doctors, if an abusive parent brings in a child for care they learn never to give the kid healthcare again after the doctor reports it. It is rooted in good intentions but the effect is it means abused children never get to see doctors, therapists, get a half-ass minimal homeschool instead of going to school, etc so that mandated reporters never enter the picture.

Re: Apple defeats liability for not scanning iCloud for CSAM

#160

Post by letmevoteplease » Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 6:03 PM UTC

GeekyBear wrote: post #151

avidiax wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is crazy people think apple isnt on the side of privacy. > It also ensured pressure from governments and plaintiffs, including CSAM victims, who preferred Apple’s more interventionist approaches, which Apple had voluntarily demonstrated it was willing to do. I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning. It proved that it was technically feasible, and was "privacy preserving". I use scare qu…

> I feel that Apple open pandora's box with the client-side scanning. That box has been open for years now. Big brother is already watching what you do on your Android device. > A Dad Took Photos of His Naked Toddler for the Doctor. Google Flagged Him as a Criminal. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveil...

This is not client side. Images just sitting on your Android phone are probably safe (although Google could push an update at any time). Your images get scanned when you back them up, send them over RCS, etc. I have even seen criminal cases originating from reverse image search - anything that touche the servers of the big tech companies, except apparently Apple, will be scanned using questionable AI and against a secret list to Protect the Children.