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

A Message to Our Customers (2016)

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#41

Post by post_break »

GeekyBear wrote: post #28
post_break wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s all great and all but Google hasn’t been touting privacy features as a selling point. With Apples decision to move forward with this I’m not beholden to any company for my phone. At least with android I can side load and do what I want.

Not having any data on a single false positives ever leave your device is MUCH more private than having that data exist on Google's servers. Also, I have huge doubts that Google is reviewing the data to be sure it isn't a false positive before handing it over to the authorities. They very famously refuse to hire expensive human beings when flawed machine learning algorithms are cheaper.

I cant seem to reply to your other comment. Here is where they talk about expanding it to third party apps:

"Apple said that while it does not have anything to share today in terms of an announcement, expanding the child safety features to third parties so that users are even more broadly protected would be a desirable goal."

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/09/apple-child-safety-feat...

Do you really think they would go to all this trouble and then say oh you don't want to get scanned? Just turn off iCloud photos.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#42

Post by GeekyBear »

post_break wrote: post #41
GeekyBear wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having any data on a single false positives ever leave your device is MUCH more private than having that data exist on Google's servers. Also, I have huge doubts that Google is reviewing the data to be sure it isn't a false positive before handing it over to the authorities. They very famously refuse to hire expensive human beings when flawed machine learning algorithms are cheaper.

I cant seem to reply to your other comment. Here is where they talk about expanding it to third party apps: "Apple said that while it does not have anything to share today in terms of an announcement, expanding the child safety features to third parties so that users are even more broadly protected would be a desirable goal." https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/09/apple-child-safety-feat... Do you really think they wou…

>Do you really think they would go to all this trouble and then say oh you don't want to get scanned? Just turn off iCloud photos.

They have literally said exactly that.

>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 create hashes of your photos on device, or is it completely inactive at that point?

A: If users are not using iCloud Photos, NeuralHash will not run

https://techcrunch.com/2021/08/10/interview-apples-head-of-p...

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#43

Post by zionic »

snowwrestler wrote: post #19
slg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What is the functional difference between the government demanding Apple add code to break device encryption, and the government demanding Apple add signatures that extend their on-device scanning beyond its intended scope of CSAM? Is this meant as a rhetorical question? Because they are pretty different from both a technical and policy perspective. Breaking encryption means the government can have access to everyth…

The case this 2016 letter is about was not a request to break phone encryption in general. The government asked Apple to assist only in getting into a few specific phones for a specific reason, under the authority of a valid warrant. And many folks thought Apple had a strong legal case to say no. Apple can’t search phones under the technology they announced, so the government can’t ask Apple for information about wha…

The list Apple uses is the property of the secret police, which is owned by the government. The government can change the database at a whim and push new targeting data to your phone.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#44

Post by juniperplant »

Tepix wrote: post #26

What are the best options for a Linux laptop these days? I switched back from a Dell XPS 13 9350 running Ubuntu to a Macbook Air M1 quite recently.

Beside the Dell XPS Developer Edition (that you already mentioned) I would consider the following:

- Lenovo laptops with Fedora preinstalled[1]

- Clevo and its HW customers: System76 and Tuxedo being the most notable ones (I think)

- Purism Librem 14

- Framework modular laptop[2]

[1] https://fedoramagazine.org/lenovo-fedora-now-available/

[2] https://frame.work/

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#45

Post by gigel82 »

GeekyBear wrote: post #38
Croftengea wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key word is publicly ... Or I missed tags?

Did I miss the sarcasm tag when it is implied that Google is immune to government demands in a manner that Apple is not?

Google does not have the capability to scan local files on your device. They still have the luxury of answering "we can't" to such demands.

But Google steps on your privacy in so many other ways, it's probably not worth defending this one technicality.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#46

Post by ByteWelder »

GeekyBear wrote: post #25
starkd wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the concern is scanning and uploading images. This could be justified in some cases. But once you open this door, it can easily expand to scan for other things. And people don't always read the notices for every update.

We already know that Apple will publicly fight Government demands to break device encryption. They have already proven that.

They cannot publicly fight FISA court gag orders. They can't even so much as mention those.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#47

Post by post_break »

GeekyBear wrote: post #42
post_break wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cant seem to reply to your other comment. Here is where they talk about expanding it to third party apps: "Apple said that while it does not have anything to share today in terms of an announcement, expanding the child safety features to third parties so that users are even more broadly protected would be a desirable goal." https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/09/apple-child-safety-feat... Do you really think they wou…

>Do you really think they would go to all this trouble and then say oh you don't want to get scanned? Just turn off iCloud photos. They have literally said exactly that. >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 create hashes of your photos on device, or is it c…

If you fundamentally believe that Apple would go to all this trouble, create hashes, machine learning, all the code required, all the work with the third party, just to tell the world including those they hope to catch they can disable it by simply turning off iCloud photos, then there really isn’t much left to discuss.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#48

Post by GeekyBear »

gigel82 wrote: post #45
GeekyBear wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I miss the sarcasm tag when it is implied that Google is immune to government demands in a manner that Apple is not?

Google does not have the capability to scan local files on your device. They still have the luxury of answering "we can't" to such demands. But Google steps on your privacy in so many other ways, it's probably not worth defending this one technicality.

Google conducts the exact same scans on their own servers, which means the results for a single false positive must be handed over to anyone with a subpoena.

With Apple's system, no data hits their servers until multiple images match known examples of kiddie porn.

If there is a single false positive, Apple won't even know about it.

You can't provide data you never had, so Apple's system is much more private.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#49

Post by GeekyBear »

post_break wrote: post #47
GeekyBear wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you really think they would go to all this trouble and then say oh you don't want to get scanned? Just turn off iCloud photos. They have literally said exactly that. >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 create hashes of your photos on device, or is it c…

If you fundamentally believe that Apple would go to all this trouble, create hashes, machine learning, all the code required, all the work with the third party, just to tell the world including those they hope to catch they can disable it by simply turning off iCloud photos, then there really isn’t much left to discuss.

If you choose to believe conspiracy theories instead of the truth, there really isn't much to discuss.

Apple has merely developed a way to scan the contents of their cloud in a way that keeps the data about false positives off their servers until they are reasonably sure there is an issue. (Multiple images must match known examples of kiddie porn before a human review is triggered)

Scanning on the server itself is way less private.

Re: A Message to Our Customers (2016)

#50

Post by frostyiguana »

I don't think it's fair to hold anyone to thoughts or idea they had. one can assume an opinion, evolve and present a different opinion after a while, that's why we live and look up for new experiences.

I don't agree with today's apple shift on encryption and disregard of privacy but we should also make sure not to hide the huge problematic that global interconnected networks have right now on vulnerable people, their lives and the lives of the ones around them.

be on guard against threat to privacy is important but maybe we should focus on finding solution for these problems too

Post reply on HN