321–323 of 323 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they don't keep track of which matches are false positives, wouldn't it be possible to be extremely unlucky and pass the threshold with nothing but false positives generated by Apple? This makes things worse not better.
No, the vouchers attached to the fake positives do not provide information for decrypting the images
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Multiple safety vouchers are required for your account to be flagged I don't see how that makes any difference. What if someone plants bad data on your device? That would of course be a concern for cloud-scanning too. I don't care how secure Apple says their devices are. There are companies that can crack them, and you can bet some unscrupulous people will use that against their opponents. Politicians and other inf…
> What if Given that a functionally identical system has been implemented by Google for years, we should already know what will happen. So let me ask. Is this already happening to people with Android devices? In terms of opportunities for framing someone, how is what Google does any different?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
> Yes, it's considered legal. No, it's not. At least not here in Germany. By law, even police officers are not allowed to look at child porn. The only institution explicitely allowed to do so is the BSI. The rest of the population implicitely incriminates themselves when they look at (not own) child porn, including Apple's legal entity or employees. See [1] for 184b Strafgesetzbuch I'm trying to point out that with t…