If Apple thinks this is a very good feature that will help CP victims, why wasn't it headlined in WWDC?
Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
241–250 of 323 posts
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple's new system is scanning personal property that doesn't belong to them and isn't yet in their cloud. Apple's new system only scans photos you attempt to upload to their cloud. Nothing else is scanned. Scanning the files on server, the way Google and Microsoft do it, means that false positive data is lying around where it can be subpoenaed and used to incriminate innocent people. >Innocent man, 23, sues Arizon…
It doesn't matter if the scan is conditional. It matters that the capability is there.
Capability has always been there. It is only worded now in a way which made it the most people understand.
Speculation about "doing something in hidden", is as valid as before.
In reality, we can be only be mad when they they are publicly making things worse in black box systems. Not about something, which is "policy change" away. Let's be mad when they actually change that policy.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once again, the notion that everything on the device is scanned under Apple's system was never true. Only photos you attempt to upload to Apple's iCloud are scanned. If you turn off iCloud photos, NOTHING is scanned. >Q: So if iCloud Photos is disabled, the system does not work, which is the public language in the FAQ. I just wanted to ask specifically, when you disable iCloud Photos, does this system continue to cre…
It’s a difference in policy vs technical capability. Currently the policy is only scan when iCloud Photos is enabled, but the capability to scan at any/all times is just a policy change away.
No, it's a difference between scanning the files that users store in their respective clouds on-server or on-device.
Scanning on-device (where a single false positive cannot be subpoenaed and misused to incriminate their customers) is simply more private.
>Innocent man, 23, sues Arizona police for $1.5million after being arrested for murder and jailed for six days when Google's GPS tracker wrongly placed him at the scene of the 2018 crime
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7897319/Police-arre...
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
> is also the world leader on consumer privacy is also an early PRISM adopter and well known on cooperation with totalitarian regimes. Censoring Belarus protesters happened several months ago.
Apple also dropped the idea of E2EE iCloud backups at the FBI's behest. They've also handed over iCloud in China to GCBD creating an incredible apparatus for the surveillance state. And now we are supposed to believe they can resist adding a hash to a list if the government asks? Are they serious?
They never said they will resist adding a hash. They just implied it with weasel words. They also said they will accept hashes from “other child protection organizations.” Which clearly means each country can define, with its own horrendous laws, what they think children need to be protected from… content showing children being put in unislamic situations (Saudi Arabia), content showing children living happily in a family with gay parents (Russia), content showing a child being abused by being forced to hold a Taiwanese flag (China), etc.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#245My opinion about: 1. Every pedophile know about the existence of this system, so I don't think it will be useful to fight those monster, maybe only marginally; 2. Anyway, is that legal ? Even if some crazy store material on his Apple hardware isn't that illegal search non usable in law courts ? 3. Child abuse is often used as Trojan horse to introduce questionable practice. What if: - the system is used to looking fo…
> 2. Anyway, is that legal ? Even if some crazy store material on his Apple hardware isn't that illegal search non usable in law courts ?
Yes, it's considered legal. Apple reviews the content first. Courts say this means it is not an illegal government search. It's a search by a private party, who then manually decides to notify the government.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once again, the notion that everything on the device is scanned under Apple's system was never true. Only photos you attempt to upload to Apple's iCloud are scanned. If you turn off iCloud photos, NOTHING is scanned. >Q: So if iCloud Photos is disabled, the system does not work, which is the public language in the FAQ. I just wanted to ask specifically, when you disable iCloud Photos, does this system continue to cre…
This fact is well known and changes nothing. The problem is that the system exists at all. The fine print WILL change - it always does, and that's also a well known fact.
By that logic, Google will definitely begin selling their treasure trove of user data to anyone with a checkbook, because the fine print WILL change.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple's new system is scanning personal property that doesn't belong to them and isn't yet in their cloud. Apple's new system only scans photos you attempt to upload to their cloud. Nothing else is scanned. Scanning the files on server, the way Google and Microsoft do it, means that false positive data is lying around where it can be subpoenaed and used to incriminate innocent people. >Innocent man, 23, sues Arizon…
>Apple's new system only scans photos you attempt to upload to their cloud. And what if in the future they decide they need to scan more than images going to the cloud? What if there is some huge epidemic of child abuse or some other terrible thing and Apple decides they need to do more? Once you open Pandora's Box you can't close it.
What if in the future Google starts selling your location data to anyone willing to write them a check?
Once you open the Pandora's Box of collecting location data, you can't close it.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#248Pushing Spyware Engine is literally abuse to all people including children and it's much worse then any problem they would claim to fight. Even if you believe them. By this move people are indoctrinated with the idea that being watched by someone big and powerful is Ok. They learn to accept such abuse and what can be worse for any safety of anyone than learning that? If one is serious about any safety one should lear…
[deleted]
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
This fact is well known and changes nothing. The problem is that the system exists at all. The fine print WILL change - it always does, and that's also a well known fact.
By that logic, Google will definitely begin selling their treasure trove of user data to anyone with a checkbook, because the fine print WILL change.
It's completely within the realm of possibility that this could happen. A few bad quarters down the road and a leadership change might be all it takes.
Many of us are taking the perspective of decades long changes given our current trajectory.
If not in our time, it could be in our children's time. This is an extremely dangerous system.
Re: Apple Has Opened the Backdoor to Increased Surveillance and Censorship
#250My opinion about: 1. Every pedophile know about the existence of this system, so I don't think it will be useful to fight those monster, maybe only marginally; 2. Anyway, is that legal ? Even if some crazy store material on his Apple hardware isn't that illegal search non usable in law courts ? 3. Child abuse is often used as Trojan horse to introduce questionable practice. What if: - the system is used to looking fo…
> What if: the system is used to looking for dissidents ... / espionage ... / profiling ... Not if. When.
Lets go one step further, Apple is a content producer with multiple streaming services now.
Using this system to look for unlicensed content will be irresistible to them.