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

Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 142 posts

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#81

Post by vetinari »

ajh13 wrote: post #59
lern_too_spel wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos and crippled alternatives.

I use NextCloud which syncs my photos from my iPhone to my in-home server. Then I use borgbackup to encrypt my photos/videos and send them to a cloud provider. All of it is automated and wasn't too much of a hassle to setup.

We are using Synology Photos in our family.

On iOS devices, it randomly stops synchronizing, and it is necessary to manually resume sync. Very annonying; most normal (not-enthusiast) users would be bitten, that they assume their photos are synced, when they are not.

Interestingly, Android devices do not have such issue.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#82

Post by skoskie »

YPPH wrote: post #9

The clear distinction being that iCloud Mail scanning doesn't happen on device. For my part, all Apple needs to do is move CSAM scanning to the cloud. No service provider can be expected to keep images of child abuse on their servers. Apple would join myriad cloud service providers in scanning for and reporting such material. My problem is the use of my own device to run the scan. It's a waste of system resources. Pr…

Doing so would sacrifice privacy. I'll take the hit on my battery.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#83

Post by _trampeltier »

YPPH wrote: post #9

The clear distinction being that iCloud Mail scanning doesn't happen on device. For my part, all Apple needs to do is move CSAM scanning to the cloud. No service provider can be expected to keep images of child abuse on their servers. Apple would join myriad cloud service providers in scanning for and reporting such material. My problem is the use of my own device to run the scan. It's a waste of system resources. Pr…

I asked in another thread (and got downvoted), if Apple does it on the user devices to save money. How much would it cost to scan everything on the serverside?

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#84

Post by shuckles »

syshum wrote: post #76
sirbutters wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment should be way up. People afraid of "what else" Apple can start scanning on our devices has always been a reality, way before CSAM. If they ever decided to remove the feature, it's not like it will magically make it impossible for Apple to ever scan our devices again in the future. They can run whatever code they want on their device. We've always put our trust on Apple to not do any shady things on our p…

What people make this aurguement fail to understand is that legally there is a HUGE difference between "We will not make software that scans files on the device" and "We will not allow the software we made to scan for anything other than CSAM" Under US law it would be very hard to force apple to do the first, but no where near as hard to compel them to change the database they of files they are scanning for...

This is a dubious legal theory. The compelled action the government asked Apple to take in the case of Apple vs. FBI was a very minor technical change.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#85

Post by mindslight »

joshstrange wrote: post #22
YPPH wrote: post #9

The clear distinction being that iCloud Mail scanning doesn't happen on device. For my part, all Apple needs to do is move CSAM scanning to the cloud. No service provider can be expected to keep images of child abuse on their servers. Apple would join myriad cloud service providers in scanning for and reporting such material. My problem is the use of my own device to run the scan. It's a waste of system resources. Pr…

Genuine question. I know this is not the situation we find ourselves in but, if your options were on-device scanning for CSAM+encrypted iCloud Photos (that Apple could not decode) OR cloud-based scanning of iCloud Photos which would you pick? Are you still opposed to all on-device scanning? Edit: Thank you all for your replies. I don't share the exact same concerns as some of you but I appreciate you sharing your tho…

Apple shoving this false dichotomy at us is the problem. I choose option #3 - Apple (et al) freely scan everything stored in their cloud, while users' devices use encryption that renders most scanning moot.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#86

Post by matthewdgreen »

shuckles wrote: post #78
matthewdgreen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iCloud Photos is a synchronization service that is integrated very tightly into the core iOS system. Even the basic APIs that allow apps to integrate with the system photo library are "iCloud aware" in the sense that the photo might not be on your device. iCloud Photos makes it possible to page photos on and off your device, which is a critical feature for people who can't afford to pay for the high-end iOS devices w…

It is hard to square the idea that Apple’s proposed CSAM detection pipeline is a fundamental affront to privacy, a human right, with the argument that turning off iCloud Photos is a false choice because alternatives don’t or can’t have feature parity. Even more so because every cloud photo service with the scale and quality of iCloud Photos is doing the same (and arguably worse!). I use Nextcloud and it is a more or…

I don’t think you need to square those options. I think that scanning people’s photos is very much an affront to privacy. Apple clearly agrees with me at some level because they are advertising that their system is “opt in”: you only get scanned if you turn on iCloud Photos. But this argument assumes that for most users this is a choice. For many users who have purchased iPhones with lower storage levels this is not really a choice — they have to use iCloud Photos to get the functionality they paid for, else they can’t synchronize photos and have to manually manage and risk deleting photos. They can use third party apps, but only with reduced functionality because Apple has chosen to privilege their own cloud service and lock those functions away from third party developers. To me it seems like Apple’s opt-in consent argument would make sense if and only if they offered users equivalent choices in third party cloud functionality: which they don’t.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#87

Post by mulmen »

YPPH wrote: post #9

The clear distinction being that iCloud Mail scanning doesn't happen on device. For my part, all Apple needs to do is move CSAM scanning to the cloud. No service provider can be expected to keep images of child abuse on their servers. Apple would join myriad cloud service providers in scanning for and reporting such material. My problem is the use of my own device to run the scan. It's a waste of system resources. Pr…

Ideally they wouldn’t be able to scan my iCloud photos at all. There’s real value in being able to maintain privacy while also gaining the benefits of live, remote storage and backup.

The generous interpretation is that Apple moved this on-device to preserve user privacy. They just miscalculated the response to an admitted backdoor.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#88

Post by skoskie »

istingray wrote: post #6

"Privacy is a human right" really does seem like it was only an advertising slogan. When Apple says "privacy" they seem to have only meant from advertisers and hackers. I'm surprised and disappointed.

Regarding Apple scanning images, you actually gain more privacy than you have now. Way more. But the near-universal dislike of this initiative leads me to believe people do not understand either a) the current way in which Apple handles images and subpoena requests; or b) some aspect of the (admittedly complex) scanning implementation. But I don't know the precise area that people are getting hung up, so it's tough to address people's fear with the right facts to alleviate that fear. Hence the very one-sided, negative response to the photo scanning. That said, if you clarify where it is that you feel you will lose privacy, I will gladly try to address that for you.

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#89

Post by lamontcg »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #31
robertoandred wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you do like the idea of a server-level scanner for a hash database assuming that you're guilty until proven innocent?

Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction people are making. Increasingly they are one and the same (if you know what I mean).

With all the attention it has been getting I think its only a matter of time before CSAM-SWATing starts to happen on those cloud services. The amount of people who know that scanning is happening just dramatically increased in the past month.

And for all we know it may have already happened and someone is currently rotting in jail who shouldn't be there.

Middle aged dude raided by cops who find CSAM on their cloud accounts, claims that his phone got hacked. Lying sack of shit pedo, of course he'd say that, right?

Re: Apple already scans iCloud Mail for CSAM, but not iCloud Photos

#90

Post by skoskie »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #70

It definitely makes sense to scan things that are passed around - mail is an example of that, and Gmail [and also Facebook, Twitter] scan for this, along with scanning for computer viruses, and in some cases (public posts) copyrighted content. It makes absolutely no sense to scan people's photos that they aren't sharing with anyone else. Why are they bothering with scanning people's photo backups at all? With the exc…

If I were permitted to put something on your server that could put you in legal jeopardy, wouldn't you want to know what I'm putting on your server?
Post reply on HN