Even if you do not get all the fancy bells and whistles like Apple does some people might be okay with that since Apple's implementation of this feature goes too far by installing the software on your device.
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 Open to Expanding New Child Safety Features to Third-Party Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well FaceBook reported some 20 million instances last year... https://www.missingkids.org/gethelpnow/cybertipline#bythenumbers
This is really turning into "one of every man born in 1924 is died" territory. I'm having a hard time following your chain of thoughts. No one logical is denying the method by which they are preforming these features, simply questioning the implications they open up for the future.
Same. Actually in-work here as I type. But moving everything is going to take a couple days moving over to my old XPS13…
If you have an iPhone, it applies to you. It doesn't matter if you are engaging in criminal activity. If you own an iPhone, your device will receive its little backdoor update whether you like it or not and the system will be monitoring the device--constantly.
Life is not a mission impossible movie. That’s really all I can say at this point. Some of the “worst case scenarios” I see being raised seem like they belong more in spy thriller movies than a serious discussion forum.
Those who drive me crazy is :
They want to spy us
After it will be terrorisme
It will run constantly (since they have said it does not run if iCloud photo is disabled).
And other **** like that.
And many don't bother to asking answer and say literally apple don't care on privacy and so on.
So yeah this time I quit even if mention, because just respond to hater (or privacy integrist) is totally stupid because you can explain to them 1+1=2 they will continue to say it mean 3 (because they have read an article on internet).
In my case I really don't think this system will be misused at all, but it does not harm to know how apple check the list of hash isn't altered to protect their customer from ill intentioned people.
Or at least not flood their check department of false positive if modified by hacker.
My primary issue with this system is it is installed on my device which Apple does not own. Apple needs to follow industry standards and keep this type of software on their iCloud photo servers just like everybody else. In addition I can see hackers screwing with Apple by modifying the hash so it constantly trips their systems.
Personally I don't trust big tech and the billionaires at the top of these companies they only care about the money so is Apple, Google and Microsoft. Btw Apple's been friendly to countries known for human right abuses otherwise if they really cared they would have closed shop there already.
For security better go with open source software when possible. People around the world can inspect the code and even improve upon it. Most android custom roms are open source they offer regular updates to their users and it's all available on github this is like going to a restaurant and having access to the kitchen.
What about people with an Apple ID who don't have 2FA turned on, use iCloud photos, and a bad actor gains access and decides to upload filth to that persons iCloud photos via iCloud web? Would Apple be notified? If so, that could cause a lot of major problems for that innocent party. I can see something like that happening.
I mean, if you really want to go down a rabbit hole (and since you are so smart you should already know this). But that example is terrible, because it could be argued that 1+1 does not actually equal 2.
My concern and I said this with the first article MR posted, was that it would drive demand for fresh CA content. Existing content came at cost of a few people suffering, but forcing the industry to move through content faster means more victims and therefore more suffering.
The market will respond to the devaluation of existing content. The market always responds. The price for new content is going to go up as existing content is added to the list. Most of the people who consume this content need help, and like other addicts, they go to great lengths to avoid being seen and will pay more and more to get their fix. Eventually, they won't be able to afford it and will either be caught or they will see the cost of producing their own content as cheaper.
The CSAM photo hashing is not the main issue here. The likelihood of one of the photos of my kids matching a CSAM entry is unlikely. It could happen but it's very unlikely. Factor in that your library actually needs to be matched to multiple entries makes it pretty much unthinkable, and most likely, theoretically impossible. Honestly, I trust that the mathematicians at Apple did their homework. We're not talking "Bob's Freelance Ltd." with student helpers here.
Abuse by governments wanting to detect same-sex couples, anti-government things, or track people of interest that might be in the background your photos? We haven't seen that happen on cloud services hosting private photos. At least it's not been reported to my knowledge. It's been done using Facebook, but, yeah, that's a chance you take when using a service like that.
The thing is, this sets a precedent for Apple adding things to the OS itself, for the greater good of the society. Willingly. It'll be way easier for governments to enforce country-based "greater good features" no matter what they say publicly. To me, that's the issue with this. They've lost their usual "we'd never do that" argument and, most importantly, they've crossed that line.
And for what? Saving the costs of the computing power needed to do this remotely, on their servers? Adding end-to-end encrypted Photo libraries? Come on.
The initial feature is noble and almost everyone on planet earth can get onboard with it. But it just doesn't stop with on-device CSAM and they're extremely naive if they think so.
Abuse by governments wanting to detect same-sex couples, anti-government things, or track people of interest that might be in the background your photos? We haven't seen that happen on cloud services hosting private photos. At least it's not been reported to my knowledge. It's been done using Facebook, but, yeah, that's a chance you take when using a service like that.
The thing is, this sets a precedent for Apple adding things to the OS itself, for the greater good of the society. Willingly. It'll be way easier for governments to enforce country-based "greater good features" no matter what they say publicly. To me, that's the issue with this. They've lost their usual "we'd never do that" argument and, most importantly, they've crossed that line.
And for what? Saving the costs of the computing power needed to do this remotely, on their servers? Adding end-to-end encrypted Photo libraries? Come on.
The initial feature is noble and almost everyone on planet earth can get onboard with it. But it just doesn't stop with on-device CSAM and they're extremely naive if they think so.
Windows doesn't scan your photos on device like the apple devices will. Yet anyway, and I don't think they will.
I believe MS and Google do the scans on the servers. I think Google and MS are going to sit back and watch how this all unfolds with iOS 15 release. There are going to be lawsuits filed.
The next big opportunity for someone is to build a Linux-based, open-sourced phone. Apple and Google seem determined to push this along...
The distinction is the software is on servers they own and it is only performed if you save the files to the cloud not on your storage device.
Who cares about end to end encryption if something's in front of it looking at your stuff? Seems kind of useless to me.
Yes, I realize that.
Apple is not being honest with people when they tell them there is greater privacy scanning on device. I think Apple is scanning on device in order to get all the information they can for the center and LEO, in case a case is filed against a user.
I think that assumption is wrong. I don't believe Apple is going to offer a truly end to end client side encryption. If they did that, it would create too much liability for them and I don't think they are brave enough to do that.
And that's fine by me -- if it's on someone else's server, it's public in my mind and their right to do. The backdoor into my phone is not okay.
Most likely, but I don't have much faith in our legal system these days, and that's part of my problem!
They can do that stuff on-device using AI (feature #1 in article) without rolling out mass surveillance (feature #2 in article).
And if I had a kid under 13, which I will in ~4 months, he/she wouldn't have a smartphone. No need.
Last edited:
This is an enigma. I don't agree with child exploitation and there is certainly none in my photo library. What concerns me is Apple scanning my personal business. It is not uncommon to scan documents as photos. There are soo many sensitive business documents which no longer remain private.
This is so non-Apple that I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities are putting the clamp down on Apple behind the scenes.
This is so non-Apple that I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities are putting the clamp down on Apple behind the scenes.