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

WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 372 posts

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#171

Post by zepto »

ianmiers wrote: post #156
siscia wrote: post #35

So I was ignorant on the issue and completely against the approach of Apple. Then HN taught me that any company storing images on their infrastructure in the US must report pedophilic images to the US government. At this point, the approach taken by Apple seems like the best one to me, if you don't want to store pictures in clear on your servers. What other technical approach are people advocating for? Another point…

Apple's banned image reporting wont stay iCloud only.iMessage is next. Maybe all data on your phone. 1) phone scanning is overkill for pics already on their servers. You don't build this and take the PR flack for something you can already do server side 2) Even if it's somehow not Apple's plan, they will be forced to use it on iMessage. Congress has been trying to for years.See the EARN IT act[0]. Apple just erroneou…

> You don't build this and take the PR flack for something you can already do server side

That’s exactly what you do if you plan to enable E2E.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#172

Post by jeromegv »

FabHK wrote: post #123
unstatusthequo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CASM scanning happens on device, right? At least so we’ve heard. My sense is Apple is trying to keep CASM off their servers. Scanning phones before it gets there was their solution to what I assume is a government demand/ultimatum. “Do this or we repatriate your foreign entity taxes” or some other shit. I too feel that Apple just caved and eroded trust that took decades to build up. The only way this gets sorted…

> My sense is Apple is trying to keep CASM off their servers It could (maybe) also be a prelude to enabling E2E encryption for everything in iCloud.

That's my theory as well. I see all those people selling their iPhones that will instead use Android, upload all their photos in Google Photos, and Google will happily share all those those same photos. Yes, yes, yes, I know, one is done on device, the other one is done in the cloud, for me that is pretty much 2 sides of the same coin.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#173

Post by jeromegv »

croutonwagon wrote: post #167
EveYoung wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Apple only plans to scan photos that are synced with iCloud, don't they? So you could just switch to an E2E encrypted alternative and drop iCloud completely.

Well..... I think its more than that. images sent with iMessage are stored in iCloud, even if the device is not necessarily uploading. How else would that have such warnings they claim in their announcement. [1] And we have seen these systems have their scope/use case changed in the past [2] To the point in the other discussion [3]. OP stated that Apples plans to scan and then upload suspected images are illegal. But…

Stop repeating this lie. iMessages photos are not part of this. This is written in the technical document. This is only photos from iCloud photos. It's been debunked, just read this article: https://daringfireball.net/2021/08/apple_child_safety_initia...

And of course the scope could change tomorrow. Just like the scope of Android could change tomorrow. They could even have changed the scope without doing an announcement!

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#174

Post by hughrr »

f3d46600-b66e wrote: post #151
hughrr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s too late either way. The fact that it even got this far through implementation says the vendor is not on my side. Not only that once capability is revealed it can be required by governments and manipulated under warrant. Particularly in some regimes, mine included, the vendor can be compelled to do something and not say anything. My comment doesn’t even cover how monumentally flawed the entire thing is either. S…

How does Nokia 215 solve the problem? All messages, including any images, wi now go through the carrier's network (and the recipient's carrier) and be subject to intercept, analysis, and sale by those two entities. I'm not sure how is that better? Wouldn't AOSP/Lineage with Signal installed be better?

I only need to make calls on it and send SMS. I never assume those are private.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#175

Post by noahjk »

dylan604 wrote: post #145
vel0city wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before buying the DSLR, I'd recommend at least checking out the 1" sensor size market. These cameras still take excellent quality photos in a wide range of lighting conditions but are so much more compact than having an interchangeable lens system. I sold my DSLR a couple of years after getting my G9x Mark II. The DSLR was always gathering dust compared to the G9x which with a small belt case could easily be taken an…

There are plenty of Micro 4/3 sensors that have interchangeable lenses too though, so you don't have to be locked into a compact camera with built-in lenses. You can have the best of both worlds.

I've heard good things about Panasonic's LUMIX G7, and it looks to be at a very reasonable price point. I personally use a Fuji X-T3 which is also more reasonably priced than full-frame, between that and Micro 4/3 price-wise. The main differentiators for a smaller sensor are low-light performance & dynamic range, but 99% of the time these won't matter. Megapixels shouldn't really even be considered - any of these cameras can take a photo to put on a billboard, DPI scales in relation to optimal viewing distance

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#176

Post by tyingq »

siscia wrote: post #35

So I was ignorant on the issue and completely against the approach of Apple. Then HN taught me that any company storing images on their infrastructure in the US must report pedophilic images to the US government. At this point, the approach taken by Apple seems like the best one to me, if you don't want to store pictures in clear on your servers. What other technical approach are people advocating for? Another point…

>if you don't want to store pictures in clear on your servers

Reading https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 , it seems that Apple may encrypt pictures on their servers, but they have the key. The list of what's actually end-to-end encrypted doesn't include photos. So, they may be scanning on your phone, but they can scan on their servers if they wanted to.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#177

Post by ianmiers »

zepto wrote: post #171
ianmiers wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's banned image reporting wont stay iCloud only.iMessage is next. Maybe all data on your phone. 1) phone scanning is overkill for pics already on their servers. You don't build this and take the PR flack for something you can already do server side 2) Even if it's somehow not Apple's plan, they will be forced to use it on iMessage. Congress has been trying to for years.See the EARN IT act[0]. Apple just erroneou…

> You don't build this and take the PR flack for something you can already do server side That’s exactly what you do if you plan to enable E2E.

Yep. That certainly is the next step. And then, once you are scanning encrypted data, iMessage is next whether you want it or not.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#178

Post by zepto »

hef19898 wrote: post #118
siscia wrote: post #35

So I was ignorant on the issue and completely against the approach of Apple. Then HN taught me that any company storing images on their infrastructure in the US must report pedophilic images to the US government. At this point, the approach taken by Apple seems like the best one to me, if you don't want to store pictures in clear on your servers. What other technical approach are people advocating for? Another point…

Because once that functionality is there it affects everyone, not just in the US. And it basically means we sell out our democratic principles, or rather allow our tech giants to sell it out. Or force them to do it, like our elected governments doing it. Either way, I don't like the outcome.

> Because once that functionality is there it affects everyone, not just in the US.

The functionality to detect CSAM uploaded to Apple’s servers or sent to pre-teens?

> And it basically means we sell out our democratic principles

What democratic principle is being sold out?

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#179

Post by nicce »

skinkestek wrote: post #170
nicce wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every cloud infrastructure holder is required for doing that. Closing an eye does not take a duty away. You must be actively pursuing that. Encryption would start flood of new laws https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2011-title18/USCO...

Tarsnap exists so either it is legal when done right or tarsnap is a walking dead and I haven't heard anything to that effect from any credible source.

I guess that service slightly goes out of the scope for active scanning, because it is for general backup, not a cloud especially for photo sharing and storing.

Re: WhatsApp lead and other tech experts fire back at Apple’s Child Safety plan

#180

Post by cultofmetatron »

hughrr wrote: post #6
zpeti wrote: post #3

I really hope there is enough momentum to stop this. It's definitely the last straw for me in terms of apple products. I haven't bought a new iphone for 4 years, I'm slowly trying to switch to a lightphone (non smartphone). My mac needs a change but I will probably switch to linux. It's absolutely ridiculous what apple has become. The exact opposite of what they used to represent, when I loved them. God rest Steve Jo…

It’s too late either way. The fact that it even got this far through implementation says the vendor is not on my side. Not only that once capability is revealed it can be required by governments and manipulated under warrant. Particularly in some regimes, mine included, the vendor can be compelled to do something and not say anything. My comment doesn’t even cover how monumentally flawed the entire thing is either. S…

get the z5. I got it a month ago, its smaller and lighter than a dslr and the image quality has been excellent.

heres my photo gallery all shot with the z5

https://www.flickr.com/photos/193526747@N04/

Post reply on HN