Apple Outlines Security and Privacy of CSAM Detection System in New Document

[fwmireault]

Understood, however what alternatives do we have? It is either iOS or Google-owned Android. And Google scans a lot. A more realistic option would be not updating to iOS 15, this will be very tangible to Apple, as they could see that at a certain time-point iOS 15 was installed, say, on 15% of devices vs 50% adoption rate of iOS 14 at the same time last year.

If you want a privacy-based OS, I recommend you grabbing a Pixel and boot it with GrapheneOS. No Google services at all on this OS

 

[one more]

Apple said at WWDC they were supporting both iOS 14 and 15. Wonder if they knew back then they’d have a mess on their hands when this came out.

the Financial Times paper broke this. I think FT found ouy and reported on this before Apple was ready to discuss it and that’s why the PR from Apple has been a mish-mash of releases.

It buffles me too why Apple decided to keep on supporting iOS 14 once iOS 15 is out. Especially considering iOS 15 will be supported by all current iOS 14 running devices. Unprecedented and weird, IMO. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[farewelwilliams]

Uh, "total invasion of your privacy" is the ONLY answer. I understand exactly how this works. I have to create hashing algorithms for work...for similar purposes, though it happens on company-supplied laptops.

I am NOT ok with Apple spying on me using the phone that I pay for. If Apple wants to start giving phones away, then I'd consider allowing them to spy on me as part of the bargain. But not on a phone that I paid for.

nope. chances of a mistake in flagging your account is 1 in a trillion and only visual derivatives of matching photos are seen. if Apple never sees the original photos, it's factually NOT a total invasion of your privacy, even if all photos of your photo library are matched.

 

[clunkmess]

Don’t want a backdoor. Can we stop this by not updating to iOS 15?

 

[cmaier]

What and who gives them a right to do that? It is still invading our PRIVACY.

No it’s not. If you upload 30 child porn photos onto someone else’s (apple’s) servers, you have no right to privacy with regard to those 30 photos. You literally revealed them to Apple. Moreover, Apple can be legally liable for possessing those photos on its servers. It’s no different than if you took snapshots and scattered them on your neighbor’s lawn and screamed “privacy! Don’t look at those!”

 

[cmaier]

Don’t want a backdoor. Can we stop this by not updating to iOS 15?

There is no back door.

 

[iGeek2019]

So, if I turn on iCloud Photos and uploaded <30 kiddy porn images, for as long as the feature was enabled, Apple wouldn’t scan for known hashes?

I get why they are trying to do this (after all it is a sickening and horrendous crime) but surely it just gives these kinds of people the chance to use other avenues to do their utmost to indulge in their perverted kicks?

Anyone who has these kind of images stored in iCloud Photos are going to delete the images from iCloud before upgrading to iOS 15, surely?

 

[PBG4 Dude]

If you want a privacy-based OS, I recommend you grabbing a Pixel and boot it with GrapheneOS. No Google services at all on this OS

I’m looking at this, or Android + No Root Firewall to keep Google apps from phoning home.

 

[usagora]

Your civilised world is dying for spying on you to keep you like an ignorant accepting whatever they want.

Theres a lot of precedents about how governments spy their citizens. I mean it’s out there, you just need to read and educate yourself.

Precedent is not evidence. No one is denying that abusive governments exist. It does not follow, however, that Apple must be paving the way for abusive governments to abuse their technology because it theoretically could happen. There is a lot of precedent for abusive parents. So I guess that means we need to take your children away from you before you decide to harm them. That's how ridiculous your logic is here.

 

[4jasontv]

nope. chances of a mistake is 1 in a trillion and only visual derivatives of matching photos are seen. if Apple never sees the original photos, it's factually NOT a total invasion of your privacy, even if all photos of your photo library are matched.

This supports the privacy invasion since they know with strong certainty if you do or do not have said images.

No it’s not. If you upload 30 child porn photos onto someone else’s (apple’s) servers, you have no right to privacy with regard to those 30 photos. You literally revealed them to Apple. Moreover, Apple can be legally liable for possessing those photos on its servers. It’s no different than if you took snapshots and scattered them on your neighbor’s lawn and screamed “privacy! Don’t look at those!”

If I pay for storage it's my server. I revealed nothing to anyone putting my content on my storage. It's not someone's lawn. It's like putting my stuff in the boot of my car. You have the same lack of private to enter my home as to search my vehicle.

 

[Rigby]

Apple also said that the on-device database of known CSAM images contains only entries that were independently submitted by two or more child safety organizations operating in separate sovereign jurisdictions and not under the control of the same government.

That's all nice and well, but it's just policy. Governments can force Apple to change it any time. The fact remains that they now have the demonstrated technical capability to scan for arbitrary images on the device, which knocks down their strongest defense against government requests and regulations.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

So, if I turn on iCloud Photos and uploaded <30 kiddy porn images, for as long as the feature was enabled, Apple wouldn’t scan for known hashes?

I get why they are trying to do this (after all it is a sickening and horrendous crime) but surely it just gives these kinds of people the chance to use other avenues to do their utmost to indulge in their perverted kicks?

Anyone who has these kind of images stored in iCloud Photos are going to delete the images from iCloud before upgrading to iOS 15, surely?

iCloud already checks for these images. Apple is moving the check from their server to your device.

 

[Johnny907]

Lots of difficult words in that explanation. I don’t think that tactic is going to work either.

People read “on device spying” and that’s that.

It baffles me that a company like Apple monumentally messed up their PR twice this summer: with AM Losless and now with this.

They should have just kept quiet about the CSAM thing and added to their iCloud T&C that they would scan for CSAM content. Nobody would have cared.

Until it was discovered by the army of basement hackers that plow through code looking for this exact sort of thing, exposing it publicly and murdering Apple’s Privacy First public persona. I get that they are trying to be transparent about it, but the issue is not how it’s explained, rather that it is happening at all. That Apple is confused about this fact is concerning because how can people so smart be this dumb.

 

[Rigby]

Until it was discovered by the army of basement hackers that plow through code looking for this exact sort of thing, exposing it publicly and murdering Apple’s Privacy First public persona. I get that they are trying to be transparent about it, but the issue is not how it’s explained, rather that it is happening at all. That Apple is confused about this fact is concerning because how can people so smart be this dumb.

I think they drank their own Koolaid. The cryptography that they developed is fairly impressive. Unfortunately it doesn't change the basic fact that they have created the means for a new level of surveillance, and it's also so complex that it's difficult to explain to the general public.

 

[Jonas07]

Precedent is not evidence. No one is denying that abusive governments exist. It does not follow, however, that Apple must be paving the way for abusive governments to abuse their technology because it theoretically could happen. There is a lot of precedent for abusive parents. So I guess that means we need to take your children away from you before you decide to harm them. That's how ridiculous your logic is here.

Again I don’t care this bs about children, I care my privacy nothing else.

 

[one more]

If you want a privacy-based OS, I recommend you grabbing a Pixel and boot it with GrapheneOS. No Google services at all on this OS

You might be able to pull it, but I reckon majority of phone users won’t be able to. There are still quite a few people out there who go to a phone shop, get a phone and then spend quite a while figuring it out, mostly learning from their peers. And what do their peers use? iOS or Android, where the latter comes in various “flavours”. 😋

 

[Khedron]

I think they drank their own Koolaid. The cryptography that they developed is fairly impressive. Unfortunately it doesn't change the basic fact that they have created the means for a new level of surveillance, and it's also difficult to explain to the general population.

It’s easy to explain, but difficult to justify.

 

[cmaier]

So, if I turn on iCloud Photos and uploaded <30 kiddy porn images, for as long as the feature was enabled, Apple wouldn’t scan for known hashes?

I get why they are trying to do this (after all it is a sickening and horrendous crime) but surely it just gives these kinds of people the chance to use other avenues to do their utmost to indulge in their perverted kicks?

Anyone who has these kind of images stored in iCloud Photos are going to delete the images from iCloud before upgrading to iOS 15, surely?

When you upload apple always scans them. It’s just that until you upload 30, Apple has no way of knowing the results of the scan.

 

[januarydrive7]

If I pay for storage it's my server. I revealed nothing to anyone putting my content on my storage. It's not someone's lawn. It's like putting my stuff in the boot of my car. You have the same lack of private to enter my home as to search my vehicle.

Not your server -- you're renting space. If I do a walkthrough in my rental and it's revealed that they've been smoking inside, I have the right to do something about that, as I own the space and have told them they aren't allowed to smoke inside.

 

[hlfway2anywhere]

Jesus. How can there be 4 pages of posts and almost every single one of them is false, emotionally charged, incorrect nonsense. Like… y’all aren’t even trying to sound like you understand this technology while you adamantly argue against it. In fact, many are spouting misunderstandings that Craig literally clears up in the interview 😂

 

[4jasontv]

When you upload apple always scans them. It’s just that until you upload 30, Apple has no way of knowing the results of the scan.

At which point they know the results and violate your privacy. So... what's your point?

 

[usagora]

Again I don’t care this bs about children, I care my privacy nothing else.

And if you knew even the first thing about what Apple is implementing here, you'd realize your privacy is being INCREASED with this move if you've been using iCloud for photos.

 

[4jasontv]

Not your server -- you're renting space. If I do a walkthrough in my rental and it's revealed that they've been smoking inside, I have the right to do something about that, as I own the space and have told them they aren't allowed to smoke inside.

And you have no right to do a walkthrough without getting permission before each walkthrough. Owning the property only grants you some rights, not absolute authority over the property. I would never grant you permission to enter until I moved out. Which, by the way, if I choose not to leave you can't kick me out.

 

[NoIdentity]

No it’s not. If you upload 30 child porn photos onto someone else’s (apple’s) servers, you have no right to privacy with regard to those 30 photos. You literally revealed them to Apple. Moreover, Apple can be legally liable for possessing those photos on its servers. It’s no different than if you took snapshots and scattered them on your neighbor’s lawn and screamed “privacy! Don’t look at those!”

You are renting space. If you rent a house/apartment you are the one responsible for what is in that house. If you keep drugs there, you will go to jail and nothing will happen to the landlord. Because privacy is expected, the landlord has no right to enter the house without your permission.

(Considering this will roll out first in US) Furthermore if we take in consideration the 4th amendment it extends to papers as well. It would stand to reason that privacy would extend to our devices as well. And in case of renting space on a cloud, why wouldn’t that be as with real estate? Encrypt everything on the cloud and the ‘owners’ can’t even access the data you store. They are mearly renting you space (disk drives).

This is a matter of principle and such changes shouldn’t be rushed and shouldn’t be discusse away from the public.

 

[cmaier]

Jesus. How can there be 4 pages of posts and almost every single one of them is false, emotionally charged, incorrect nonsense. Like… y’all aren’t even trying to sound like you understand this technology while you adamantly argue against it. In fact, many are spouting misunderstandings that Craig literally clears up in the interview 😂

Not to mention people from Germany who keep disliking all my posts, when this system doesn’t even work in Deutschland.