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

Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 390 posts

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#321

Post by pseudalopex »

Terretta wrote: post #268
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/14231090022805135... and https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/14231094582936289... kind of sums it up. Clearly there is an intent to progress to more than just what's been shared with iCloud. Otherwise there'd be no need for software on the devices themselves at all.

The slant I took from that thread is this is the way to comply with known-bad-hash matching requirement while preserving E2E encryption for cloud-stored content: checking hash at an end. Don’t need to MITM when you put an M at an end.

iCloud photos aren't E2E encrypted now. This could be a way to add E2E encryption while preserving the current level of surveillance. Except the article said Apple can decrypt suspect photos. And it isn't a legal requirement apparently.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28077619

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#322

Post by doe88 »

What if under a secret order Apple is instructed to insert non-CSAM photos, to match whatever a relevant juridiction wants to match? Effectively, you now have a black box operating on your own computer, this is deeply disturbing. This is not going to end well. And by the way this is like all the DNA stuff, you're not only at risk from your own computer but also the all the libraries your picture happened to be in.

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#323

Post by MikeDelta »

notadev wrote: post #261
babyshake wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this means it is checking if you are sharing known CP images? That does seem to be much less invasive and problematic as there is likely no good reason to be sharing these images.

It’s not just checking files you are sharing, it’s also scanning files that exist on your device. The worry, or slippery slope argument, is that it’s one step away from scanning your device for other types of content, like memes critical of the government or just general wrongthink.

A lot of governments would be very interested in this feature.

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#324

Post by pseudalopex »

threatofrain wrote: post #82
Ancapistani wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The odds of This number is equivalent to generating 1 billion UUIDs per second for about 85 years." If we're talking about random files, sure. What if the files are intentionally created to match the desired hash? The malicious actor doing this could be a private party intending to disrupt your life, but it could also be law enforcement as a means of gaining access to your device when it would otherwise require a…

Or what if you're a researcher who has downloaded a collection of these assets? Wouldn't you be a very high signal hit, beyond even actual perpetrators of crime? Would you need the protection of an umbrella organization to do research? Or register with the government perhaps?

The law doesn't have an exception for independent research.

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#325

Post by alkonaut »

Causality1 wrote: post #35
partiallypro wrote: post #14

I really don't see how this is going to end well, there could be perfectly innocent photos on someone's phone of their own children doing perfectly normal things that kids do. Like a kid running butt naked around the house, or a photo of something like a rash that is sent to a nurse friend for advice on what it is etc. I'm all for protecting children from being abused, but how are they going to filter what is normal…

Yeah if you ran the giant box of photos in my mom's closet through an AI you'd totally get hits from photos of baby me being bathed in the sink, baby me running around the back yard naked, etc. This can't end well.

If this even comes close to doing any “recognition” on local content and isn’t just (as the article says) a simple lookup of known images through hashes, then that would be a massive scandal. So I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt until it’s clarified, as the only confirmed way it works is the image hash lookup.

There are words like “neural” and “trained” here, but no clear sign that there is actually any kind of image recognition that would risk false positives other than hash collisions.

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#326

Post by runjake »

Retric wrote: post #172
cronix wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, AI is very good at these things and never makes mistakes. It is so advanced it even understands nuance and complex communication mechanisms like sarcasm in text, even if it's only a single sentence to contrast! It will be able to know exactly the context of each image and it will affect only the sickos. We're also working on watching your face through the camera to see your true expression when viewing t…

There is zero AI classification involved, it’s a lookup vs hashes of known child porn images. You would need a hash collision, misidentified photo in the dataset, or legitimate use case to end up with a false positive.

You are wrong. It's AI.

Citation: https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni...

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#327

Post by seanicus »

itake wrote: post #33

WhatsApp automatically saves photos sent to the phone to the Photo Album. Does this mean they will get a knock on their door if someone sent a bad image?

First thing I thought of too. A 'prank' that has far greater consequences for the target than swatting.

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#328

Post by alkonaut »

sandworm101 wrote: post #39

As any of the lawyers here can attest, the legal definitions here open to huge debates. Some material is unambiguous, other images reside extensive grey areas. The legality of material can even change based on context. Something that is perfectly legal in one area can be absolutely illegal in another. Example: If I had to list the most iconic photographs in world history, one of them is of a totally nude child (Vietn…

Who would add “gray area” pictures to the database of CP images that are matched?

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#329

Post by ggreer »

trasz wrote: post #287
ggreer wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has a high incarceration rate because it has a high crime rate. If EU countries had US levels of crime, they'd have US levels of incarceration. Also China doesn't count Uyghurs as incarcerated despite the fact that the PRC is committing genocide against them.[1] The PRC imprisons almost 2 million of Uyghurs a year. Of those, around a quarter million die. Oh and there's the forced sterilizations, destruction of…

US has a high crime rate, because it has laws introduced specifically to increase the crime rate in specific racial groups; that’s where the War on Drugs came from. China doesn’t count Uyghur extremists as incarcerated for the same reason the US doesn’t count their brethren it kills en masse in Middle East as death sentences. It’s just a different thing. As for the rest of the list - most of it is just US state propa…

> US has a high crime rate, because it has laws introduced specifically to increase the crime rate in specific racial groups; that’s where the War on Drugs came from.

That's not true. If you released everyone convicted of a drug crime (including manufacturing, selling, or distributing), you'd decrease the US prison population by 20%.[1] I'm all in favor of ending the drug war, but that won't do much to the incarceration rate. Also, the drugs that are illegal in the US are just as illegal in other developed countries (if not moreso). To use one example: in the UK, you can get up to 7 years in prison for simply possessing LSD or shrooms, and life in prison for for supplying or producing them.[2] No european country has legalized recreational marijuana[3], while the state I live in legalized it a decade ago. Now look at China's drug laws. While in China I've been solicited for all kinds of illegal goods and services, but never drugs. Stolen or fake merchandise? Sure. Prostitution? Of course. But drugs? Not a chance. The reason for this is that China executes people for drug possession. They randomly test foreigners entering the country and prosecute them even if they have no drugs on them.[4] The government raids nightclubs and residences, then forces everyone to take drug tests and prosecutes them if they test positive.

But please go on about how oppressive the US is.

I've seen you comment on China several times before and it's always in favor of the PRC. This confuses the hell out of me. Consider this: We could not have this discussion in China. To contradict the official narrative there is to risk your career and your freedom. Yes, the US and other countries have big problems, and it's good to try and fix them. But the level of surveillance and oppression in China is unlike anything in the west.

1. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html#firstmyth

2. https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing

3. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-of-world-cannabi...

4. https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/china/local-laws-an...

Re: Apple plans to scan US iPhones for child abuse imagery

#330

Post by pseudalopex »

shuckles wrote: post #209
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/14231090022805135... and https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/14231094582936289... kind of sums it up. Clearly there is an intent to progress to more than just what's been shared with iCloud. Otherwise there'd be no need for software on the devices themselves at all.

That is not the only explanation. Involving the device could be considered better because it doesn’t require Apple to build infrastructure to scan all your photos in the cloud, which could be more easily repurposed without user consent.

They scan photos in the cloud now. And do you think Apple will announce and let users opt out of client side scanning changes?
Post reply on HN