Didn't note that, but definitely wouldn't support that either, unless there is an option you can fully disable it.
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 Outlines Security and Privacy of CSAM Detection System in New Document
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if an Apple exec says x and his statement is supported by rest of apple engineers and privacy executive and you said Craig is lying you are basically saying the entire company is not to be trusted. Do you know how logic works? have you ever studied tautology?
iCloud Photos are turned on by default whenever you sign on to iCloud.
With FaceID, it works on device in the secure enclave. Nothing is being transmitted to Apple, even if you have iCloud. Obviously that's more trustable.
If Apple announced tomorrow that they will be matching your FaceID data with known criminals, I'm sure people would be shocked as well and up in arms.
You are a little confused. If Mr. Blue tells a lie this afternoon, that does not mean that he has always lied for the past twenty years. If I don't trust Apple today it does not mean I have never trusted Apple.
Like I said, Apple did number 2 so in the midst of this worldwide mass scanning system deployment, they have plausible deniability. The concern is, why did they decide to design such complex system in the first place? If they simply didn't want CP on their servers, the e2e iCloud encryption would solve it just fine. Apple wouldn't know what users are uploading, done deal.
If you are not trusting the word of a person who is adamant against accusations you are basically questioning the persons character. this is not about Craig saying trivial things. the WSJ directed accusations against Apple and Craig responded to those. You are saying those responses to allegations are lies. Thats questioning his character and thus by proxy the company itself of its intentions.
Defocusing won't get us anywhere. In every country outside the United States, OS components are still installed by local providers. Apple has always shown this so far, and you had to agree to it before you could use the phone. This is exactly where the services will build in their interfaces, you know that very well.
And I have loved Apple for decades, and there are just ****ed-up systems besides Apple, so let me defend Apple against its imposed scheme. Plus, I'm an Apple shareholder.
Exactly. Today but that does not mean I never trusted him and the company which is what you stated. That ends this topic.
Why on earth are you going on about iCloud settings, because the software is on your hardware rather than on iCloud.
Apple could have chosen to have all checks via iCloud and its server and the fact they haven't makes it far more of a concern as whether you use iCloud or not, that coding is still within your system, still capable of being modified at any time, and if there was no intention of doing that then why are they seemingly so intent on doing it via installing the software on customers hardware rather than iCloud?
We're not communicating.
"2. Apple do not have access to the original database only the hashes. If the hash for a photo of BLM was added then Apple wouldn’t have a clue and would just push it to users."
Apple does not want the *reference* original database of CP photo jpegs on their premises (whether that be a computer file, physical binder, etc) to begin with. Which is why Apple can't determine if a BLM photo was nefariously slipped into the hash table by a higher authority.
Unfortunately, the world is not that simple.
Sometimes it is definitely a matter of life experiences that makes an credible system assessor.
National security letter - Wikipedia
Last edited:
What is your background and credentials (academic, work-related, research papers, etc) that qualify you to assess the methods and precision you question and cast doubt on up above?
Fauci and Brilliant (among others) are my "tangent" because myself being an electrical engineer I'm not qualified to assess precision and methods with respect to infectious disease research and control. Therefore I have to rely on the words and papers of epidemiologists/virologists who have a demonstrated and verifiable track record of positive results over decades.
So please tell me about yours.
Last edited:
I wonder if the real reason they want it via individual hardware via operating systems is for identifying source IP or even unique identifying device data which would be available via system report and elsewhere? Apple really have opened a can of worms by seeking to have this incorporated in operating systems where they could do this on their servers, so they can't really be surprised at the suspicions and concern it causes, which for me would be allayed immeasurably if they announce they are scrapping idea of incorporating it in systems software and instead keeping their CSAM idea checked by iCloud server so everyone would know their own hardware was sacrosanct.
The fact they have no access to the original database is irrelevant as by having the software on customers own equipment they have access to unique identifying data, and its still surveillance.
Now if they want to keep their hash idea and where in my experience this will make it harder for agencies employed to stop child abuse and child pornography, then they can use their own iCloud to do it, but the fact they want to introduce it via operating systems send a massive red light of concern.
Remember System Integraty Protection does not apply to Apple, so they can amend that part of the software any time they choose whatever they suggest is they 'aim'.
The fact they intend to do it via Systems Software doesn't give one confidence they won't modify it. Take it off the systems software, keep checking on iCloud then a lot of the fears subside.
True. That's the plausible deniability. Apple simple has no knowledge since they only see hashes. Thus it really sends a chill, at least for me, that a giant tech company has set up a worldwide mass scanning system where they themselves are not accountable for the implication. "We're just matching hashes."
Just got a chance to take this screenshot. This is what "optimized storage" image looks like before it is being downloaded. If you manage to get a slow connection and your target image is very big (20M or more), the effect will last longer.
And this is what the same photo looks like when it is being downloaded.
Zoom it in for dramatic effect.
If this is what Apple has to work with, any human can easily identify the major features of a given photo without the need for much detail. Even if the "thumbnail" res goes down a bit, recognizing features is not hard to do.
Granted, Apple may not use the same "thumbnail" I use here, but imagine this is what Apple will receive for "questionable" photos. They don't take up much space and can be uploaded near-instantly too.
And this is what the same photo looks like when it is being downloaded.
Zoom it in for dramatic effect.
If this is what Apple has to work with, any human can easily identify the major features of a given photo without the need for much detail. Even if the "thumbnail" res goes down a bit, recognizing features is not hard to do.
Granted, Apple may not use the same "thumbnail" I use here, but imagine this is what Apple will receive for "questionable" photos. They don't take up much space and can be uploaded near-instantly too.
So it’s not a case of trusting Apple (which would be stupid enough) but trusting Apple and every government that can affect Apple’s share price.
The most stupid thing imaginable. How could you possibly do worse?
Here is Apple’s own privacy policy from May 10th 2019. The day before they didn’t have the “scanning part” in it.
“[…]We may also use your personal information for account and network security purposes, including in order to protect our services for the benefit of all our users, and pre-screening or scanning uploaded content for potentially illegal content, including child sexual exploitation material.[…]”
Here is another that is now highly questionable:
"Apple is committed to protecting the security and privacy of our users. ......"
or this advert for Iphone specifically citing privacy
Apple’s new privacy ad imagines Thanos-snapping your stalkers out of existence
Do it, Felix.
www.theverge.com
Why should Chinese still buy expensive iPhones now?
I will be watching the stock market closely. Of course, analysts need time first, so I am still calm these days.
Nope. I love Apple and I’m afraid, they are forced to go the wrong way.
National security letter - Wikipedia
Apple Inc. is the technology department of the CCP. No thinking Chinese person has been buying Apple for years, and certainly has no reason to change their mind now.
Therefore, by Apple employing E2E encryption on their servers, people could upload massive amounts of CP to their heart's content. And that would be a-ok because Apple wouldn't know about it?