A catalog of naturally occurring images whose Apple NeuralHash is identical

Post by StrLght » Wed, Aug 25, 2021, 2:36 PM UTC

oauea wrote: post #127

StrLght wrote: post #75

I don't really get what this repository is trying to achieve and what's the point of collecting collisions. Collisions will happen, that's just how it is with hashes. It's already a public knowledge that Apple has 2 more systems (some server-side verification and a manual check later) to prevent false-positives. So what's the point of researching collisions in NeuralHash?

Are you fine with an apple employee looking at all your private pictures just because some hashing algorithm decided you're a pedophile? Personally, I'm not.

Post by sabellito » Wed, Aug 25, 2021, 2:39 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #157

foxfluff wrote: post #123

My take on this is that the system is by and large useless. It won't catch anything but the dumbest of dumb criminals, because those who care about CSAM can surely figure out a better way to share images, or find a way to obfuscate their images enough to bypass the system (the lower the false positive rate, the easier it must be to trick the system). So what's left when all the criminals this is supposed to catch hav…

> It won't catch anything but the dumbest of dumb criminals Dumb is a pretty accurate description of a large fraction of criminals. For the most part you only get smart criminals when you are talking about crimes where you have to be smart to even plan and carry out the crime.

Post by wyager » Wed, Aug 25, 2021, 2:47 PM UTC

simondotau wrote: post #70

roody15 wrote: post #33

Apple has yet to make a valid reason for implementing client side CSAM scanning. According to Apple only images that will be uploaded to iCloud will be scanned. If this is the case there is zero reason to scan locally and you can just scan the uploaded image once it is on the server. Apple has not implemented E2E nor has it released a statement indicating this will be implemented in the future.

There is an interesting constitutional quirk which arises from the scanning being done client side, specifically for US citizens. If the US Government forced Apple to add other entries to the hash table, this would constitute a warrantless Government search of the private physical property of US citizens. This is a clear-cut, unambiguous breach of the 4th Amendment. Whereas if the CSAM scanning was performed exclusiv…

Post by programmer_dude » Wed, Aug 25, 2021, 2:49 PM UTC

theshrike79 wrote: post #116

programmer_dude wrote: post #22

Can this affect people who do not use Apple products?

No, how would it?

Post by zepto » Wed, Aug 25, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

wyager wrote: post #165

simondotau wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an interesting constitutional quirk which arises from the scanning being done client side, specifically for US citizens. If the US Government forced Apple to add other entries to the hash table, this would constitute a warrantless Government search of the private physical property of US citizens. This is a clear-cut, unambiguous breach of the 4th Amendment. Whereas if the CSAM scanning was performed exclusiv…

This is already a warrantless search that’s effectively controlled by the government. Obviously there’s enough chaff in the air to prevent that from being legally useful in any way.