There are probably some people unaware enough to get caught.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Addresses CSAM Detection Concerns, Will Consider Expanding System on Per-Country Basis
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s too late already! The system is already built, not released yet, I understand. What will now stop it from being abused is what I am interested in. So long, Privacy..
Depends. You have no clue what the winning numbers in the lottery are going to be. There are probably lists containing tons of hashes from this database out already. If you get a hold of one photo with the correct hash you know for certain that you have a "winning" ticket. What happens if bad people sit on these photos and starts distributing them using iMessage to various innocent people? Unless you have to manually put these photos within your iCloud Photo Library and upload them to iCloud before it triggers I suppose you have to be extremely stupid to get fooled. But if it scans iMessage and iCloud in general various botnets could simply start distributing a few images to a list of people that got iMessage in iCloud enabled and they get instantly flagged. Unless I'm missing something here.
Why are people so upset? Time and time again people say this is Apple's OS. They own it, not you. You have no rights. You're just licensing their software and if you don't like the way Apple operates, there are other smartphone options or develop your own.
This is what we get when it's a closed system so deal with it.
This is what we get when it's a closed system so deal with it.
Yay, my photo library contains over 31,000 lottery tickets!
Nobody here is saying Apple has to be forced by law to make certain decisions. They're (we're) just upset that they're making this decision. And yes, I'm actually switching. My iPhone 6S isn't going to last forever, and when it goes, it doesn't get replaced with another iPhone.
Why would that mean users can't get upset if Apple implement features they don't agree with? Your logic makes no sense. Obviously, if Apple starts to upset users they might switch platforms. But as a user of macOS, iOS and iPadOS, why wouldn't I raise questions when Apple is about to implement features that seems to be anti-privacy with potential loopholes? What would I possibly gain from not giving feedback if I don't feel like I'm on board with what they are trying to implement?
Sure they are free to implement whatever they feel like unless it's breaking laws. Doesn't mean that I as a user have to agree with it.
What are you going to switch to that doesn't do something like this? Google does it too. Amazon, even Verizon cloud and others, also do it. Maybe not the same way yet, but the effect is similar.
I'm not challenging you. I actually wondering if there are good options.
From Apple:
On device scanning iMessage is for warning children about sensitive content.
It is sort of strange, the usual Pro Apple Stance are nearly non existent on this issue, and comments ( at least for now ) seems to be overwhelmingly against the idea. On MacRumors!
Where are those Apple defenders that claims Apple could do no wrong? Not even appearing in downvote?
Where are those Apple defenders that claims Apple could do no wrong? Not even appearing in downvote?
So, what? Now Apple’s sucking my battery life down by running this **** in the background?
Soon, our phones and all of our digital lives were directly linked with law enforcement through AI. We knew about this, and agreed to it because at first they said it was for the safety of our children. We didn't do anything because we were quite used to our private information being shared with mega corporations like Facebook and Google. But soon it was not so much about the children, but about "terrorism", and the safety of society in general, and eventually about the safety of the State. At first, the AI was always overseen by humans. But the numbers were simply too big, and AI was simply too reliable. Just like early YouTube copyright strikes, the AI would act entirely on its own, with no way to contact a human being in case of a misunderstanding.
It was deemed that any enemy of the State is the enemy of everyone. Those who committed crimes were enemies. In China, unpaid debts were considered a crime and carried with it a reduction in your Social Credit Score. Being a Uyghur or being in contact with one was, in itself, reason to be sent to a "reassignment camp" (concentration camp). In Russia, being gay or transexual was a crime and carried a death penalty. In Hungary, homosexuality and pedophilia were made nearly identical by law and carried a lengthy prison sentence and a place in the Registry for life. Other countries used the system to fight political opposition by automatically flagging journalists, activists and even those who held an opposing opinion about the State. Many of these people died in what was often claimed to be suicide, hanging themselves unexpectedly, "accidentally" falling out the window, or suddenly falling ill and dying on long flights with symptoms of muscle weakness and vomiting.
There were two approaches to the situation: like with all things, most people just accepted it and went on with their lives, conforming to the laws as best as they could. You just had to be careful not to criticize the state, or mention your sexual preference to anyone. When talking with others, you just had to make sure that both of your phones was in another room.
A minority vowed to live offline, without a smartphone and with a very limited online presence. Of course this made simple, everyday things very difficult: making and receiving payments, applying for jobs and loans, or even using public transport was made impossible without a smartphone. Even without a phone, the phones of others around you could still hear and see you, and easily triangulate your location, recognize your face and voice, and even your fingerprint if you ever came into contact with them. These people were called "the Offline" and formed their own sub-society within the general society. Cartels formed with various underground groups who were in charge of employing and taking care of the Offline.
It was deemed that any enemy of the State is the enemy of everyone. Those who committed crimes were enemies. In China, unpaid debts were considered a crime and carried with it a reduction in your Social Credit Score. Being a Uyghur or being in contact with one was, in itself, reason to be sent to a "reassignment camp" (concentration camp). In Russia, being gay or transexual was a crime and carried a death penalty. In Hungary, homosexuality and pedophilia were made nearly identical by law and carried a lengthy prison sentence and a place in the Registry for life. Other countries used the system to fight political opposition by automatically flagging journalists, activists and even those who held an opposing opinion about the State. Many of these people died in what was often claimed to be suicide, hanging themselves unexpectedly, "accidentally" falling out the window, or suddenly falling ill and dying on long flights with symptoms of muscle weakness and vomiting.
There were two approaches to the situation: like with all things, most people just accepted it and went on with their lives, conforming to the laws as best as they could. You just had to be careful not to criticize the state, or mention your sexual preference to anyone. When talking with others, you just had to make sure that both of your phones was in another room.
A minority vowed to live offline, without a smartphone and with a very limited online presence. Of course this made simple, everyday things very difficult: making and receiving payments, applying for jobs and loans, or even using public transport was made impossible without a smartphone. Even without a phone, the phones of others around you could still hear and see you, and easily triangulate your location, recognize your face and voice, and even your fingerprint if you ever came into contact with them. These people were called "the Offline" and formed their own sub-society within the general society. Cartels formed with various underground groups who were in charge of employing and taking care of the Offline.
Last edited:
I don't think Google is doing anything this brazen with Android. This is next level.
You're right that there's not a good option if I'm super concerned about my own privacy. The thing is, I'm not. I'm just sick of how arrogant Apple is with the iPhone. I've gone back and forth about whether to buy a new one, but this tips me clearly to the other side now. If Google pisses me off enough, I might come back, but between the two I'd rather not be supporting the most valuable company in the world, who controls rather locked-down and vertically-integrated platforms, if they're showing that they can't wield that power responsibly.
One good thing about Google is their corporate structure being so non-hierarchical. When the employees don't like something, they have real power to stop it, and they have. Apple is much more hierarchical from what I hear, which is probably more efficient (and it shows in their clearly superior products) but also means they have a greater potential to do nasty things than Google ever will.
That said, I'm not going to fully embrace Android either. Probably just gonna have a cheapo phone to text and call people with, maybe call an Uber.
Last edited:
"Apple did admit that there is no silver bullet answer as it relates to the potential of the system being abused, but the company said it is committed to using the system solely for known CSAM imagery detection."
In other words, Apple is acknowledging that, despite their best intentions, this system could be used maliciously by authoritarian governments to further oppress their citizens.
But hey, think of the children! /S
In other words, Apple is acknowledging that, despite their best intentions, this system could be used maliciously by authoritarian governments to further oppress their citizens.
But hey, think of the children! /S
It's not literally 1 in a trillion. Hash collisions are more like 1 in 2^256 if it's SHA-2, as far as we know. Bitcoin is testing that theory constantly.Turns out 1 in a trillion isn't quite as reassuring as you might think...
I'm not happy about it, but in the long run there is a greater good. I can guarantee, imo, that android will be sporting this extra functionality as well at some point in the future.
This move by apple is NOT about addressing child porn. It is and always will be about appearing to address child porn. That way non-critical thinkers have a reason feel good and to sleep better at night because they believe in Apple and its advertising.
Once programmed, always programmed, it started in grade school and continues on.
Once programmed, always programmed, it started in grade school and continues on.
As many have stated before, this is ripe for abuse.
Why would Tim and Apple spend so much time trying to differentiate the brand using a privacy-first mantra, then out of nowhere launch this?
It makes no sense.
Why would Tim and Apple spend so much time trying to differentiate the brand using a privacy-first mantra, then out of nowhere launch this?
It makes no sense.
Last edited:
Unrealistic pontification has real meaning to you then. Good to know, but sad none-the-less.
Maybe you have that crystal ball that tells the future with certainty. I only stated an opinion of the subject of the thread. But I guess if the shoe fits wear it.👍
Because....the children. Think of the children!!! /S
Are you speaking of Apple? If so Cook is not an accountant.
that is concerning with this. Some spam bot maliciously sending out abunch of these hashtagged photos and Apple flags you, reports you and then up to you to use life savings on a lawyer to prove your innocence.
Last edited: