Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

freedom.press

51–60 of 145 posts

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#51

This article is full of inaccuracies. a) People have extracted a pre-release version from an older iOS phone. It is not the one that will be released and not the same one Apple uses server-side to verify the process. b) Adversaries can not reasonably break this process by flooding it with bad data across a range of compromised phones. The client side version is there to prevent this as is the fact it would require ja…

For b), I can't see how creating spurious icloud accounts and spoofing it will be hard at it's face. I have made dozens of icloud accounts personally for testing in the past. They may take steps to address this attack vector, it's not an unsolvable problem but it isn't solved by requiring a device or icloud account as far as I can tell. For c), the problem isn't just trusting Apple, for whom the hashes are somewhat o…

I'm not arguing that these aren't real problems, but neither are unique problems of the the client side scanning solution. It's the same or maybe even worse with server side scanning.

I'd assume FB, Google & co have some solution to b), so Apple should be able to figure out something. For c), at least Apple takes extra precautions by requiring the photos to be in two separate database provided by different governments. (Maybe other cloud providers do that, too, I don't know).

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#52
post #43

Fuck the cloud. Offer 256 and 512GB iPhones and up and give a feature set to entirely and permanently disable cloud function. Save that, and I'll throw my iPhone in the God damn trash. I'll use a raspberry Pi or flip phone if I have to do so.

You can use an iPhone without ever logging into iCloud. You can even install MDM profiles to prevent it.

And I already do, but as a default standard I would just much rather see a phone large enough to never need iCloud but of course I didn't address the other issues that will now come from a proprietary phone. I will make good on buying a Librem 5 in the interim and throw the iPhone right in the dumpster though if they push forward with on device scanning and such. I never leave GPS turned on, I don't give any apps access to such features, and I buy phones outright in cash and put them on prepaid from the start. This is not good enough. If the next set of surveillance features are scanning messages, photos, videos on personal devices then it's nothing but a rented device and the only option are custom fully open source devices.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#53
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does anyone even assume that a bad actor would need to apply pressure? These databases are unauditable by design -- all they'd need to do is hand Apple their own database of "CSAM fingerprints collected by our own local law enforcement that are more relevant in this region" (filled with political images of course), and ask Apple to apply their standard CSAM reporting rules. That's it... Tyranny complete.

1) The DB must be updated on both the server and the client. Apple's solution requires the DBs to match, essentially. So you can't update the DB without everyone knowing it was changed. 2) Apple has trillions of dollars to lose by selling out to a shitty change like that. Do those things mean nothing bad can come of it? Hell no. But, right now we have FISA courts and silent warrants sucking in data without anyone kno…

Apples move gives away another piece of the puzzle to mass monitoring and surveillance.

Apples move brings it one step closer for FISA courts and silent warrants to have access beyond what we send over the network to now what resides on our phones.

Apple is giving mass surveillance a foot hold into living on and monitoring data on our personal phones.

Apples has created the back door for increased surveillance: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/08/if-you-build-it-they-w...

Tell Apple don't scan our phones: https://act.eff.org/action/tell-apple-don-t-scan-our-phones

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple's solution on this requires client and server communication to flag an image Well of course it does, would be a very pointless surveillance system if it scanned for stuff and then threw away the result. I've also read the technical papers and all other info put out by Apple so far and my takeaway is that the system is generic, it's not designed specifically for images but can be used with any old fingerprint…

Sure, you're totally right. But right now all that data is available to Apple. If they wanted to they could just generate a set of keys, replicate one of your iCloud devices, and send all your iMessages to a 3rd party, etc. If CSAM scanning is coming, show me a better solution. I don't think there's a world ahead of us that doesn't include it for all platform-hosted photos.

I reject the premise that CSAM scanning is a solution to anything, especially if the goal is to E2EE encrypt the rest of the photos.

My understanding from following this debacle is that law-enforcement don't have resources to investigate everyone who just have CSAM they focus on people who match and have other photos of novel abuse they can track down, and here they will only get an account name and a list of 30 CSAM photos the user had.

All this system will do is drive up Apples numbers on a "total child abuse found" scoreboard and do very little to help any actual children in need.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#55

This technology will soon be out of Apple’s control. Higgins correctly highlights the immense pressure Apple will get from governments and other actors to bend the technology and use it for something else than csam. It will happen, people are probably already thinking how to apply such pressure. Sooner or later Apple will cave in and they will have only themselves to blame when freedom supports in Sudan or LGBTQ acti…

Tell Apple don't scan our phones: https://act.eff.org/action/tell-apple-don-t-scan-our-phones

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#56
post #43

Fuck the cloud. Offer 256 and 512GB iPhones and up and give a feature set to entirely and permanently disable cloud function. Save that, and I'll throw my iPhone in the God damn trash. I'll use a raspberry Pi or flip phone if I have to do so.

iPhones already come in 256GB and 512GB versions, though you have to go up to the iPhone Pro line to get 512GB.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#57
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does anyone even assume that a bad actor would need to apply pressure? These databases are unauditable by design -- all they'd need to do is hand Apple their own database of "CSAM fingerprints collected by our own local law enforcement that are more relevant in this region" (filled with political images of course), and ask Apple to apply their standard CSAM reporting rules. That's it... Tyranny complete.

1) The DB must be updated on both the server and the client. Apple's solution requires the DBs to match, essentially. So you can't update the DB without everyone knowing it was changed. 2) Apple has trillions of dollars to lose by selling out to a shitty change like that. Do those things mean nothing bad can come of it? Hell no. But, right now we have FISA courts and silent warrants sucking in data without anyone kno…

Apple can’t be selling out if they literally have no way of knowing what is in the database of illicit content.

That is why they said that the content has to be in two separate nation’s databases. Of course, there is no information that I’ve seen about what other nation’s db they would use. And without another nation, there will be no content in the database? I doubt it.

Regardless, it’s a moot issue, since we already know that the 5 eyes all conspire and would gladly add content for each other, the same as several middle-east nations.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#58
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse because the cloud is someone else's computer. When you're in someone else's house, you go by their rules. Your devices, however, are your own house.

So don't use iCloud Photo. The tech literally can't work without the server component.

This statement is everything wrong with how Apple's privacy is interpreted. The problem isn't iCloud Photo - it's that Apple can install ANY software they want at ANY time for ANY reason on ANY of their devices without your permission, consent or even notice.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#59
post #43

Fuck the cloud. Offer 256 and 512GB iPhones and up and give a feature set to entirely and permanently disable cloud function. Save that, and I'll throw my iPhone in the God damn trash. I'll use a raspberry Pi or flip phone if I have to do so.

iPhones already come in 256GB and 512GB versions, though you have to go up to the iPhone Pro line to get 512GB.

Good point, and well taken. I'm still on an 8Plus though.

Re: Apple’s device surveillance plan is a threat to user privacy – and press freedom

#60
post #31

There’s been such a debate over this now that I don’t know why Apple are still trying? It’s not even their job to catch child porn. There are many far-reaching cooperations like at Interpol and Europol that successfully bust child porn groups? Even anonymizing networks like Tor are not safe havens. These guys don’t have it easy even today. So why is Apple suddenly extremely adamant about this? Would it even cost them…

One possibility is that they'd like to go E2EE with all iCloud data, including photos, and this lets them do that without the politics (DC level) falling out against them.

Can you really call it E2EE if one of the ends is wide open?
Post reply on HN