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 Publishes FAQ to Address Concerns About CSAM Detection and Messages Scanning
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But that is the one point that is so clear in the white paper that I was having difficulty with you understanding…the hash method is so precise, simply taking a pic of a baby in a bath and having it match a database image is so astronimaclly high, much less than more than one, it shouldn’t be an area of concern.
The reason for people not accepting this on this forum is either them not understanding what one in one trillion really means or they simply do not believe what Apple is saying as it pertains to the odds. I can’t really help with either of those…much…(outside of the comical, yet true, examples of odds in other cases. 🤣 )
17 things more likely to happen to you than winning the lottery
It’s true: You’re far more likely to be struck by lightning in your lifetime than win the lottery. But let’s take lightning strikes off the table. Here are 17 things that will alm...
www.reviewjournal.com
Last edited:
Those with more awareness and experience know that it is not "what if" it gets used for something different in the future. Those with more awareness and experience know that the only reason they're doing this in the first place is to set the stage and pave the way for something else down the line.
But then Apple throws a wrench in the concept by stating any modifications would get flagged. It is such a contradiction if the image needs to match to those such great details, and then say if it’s modified, it will get flagged. If it’s a similar bathroom, similar angle of the picture and things like that. I don’t feel like the false positive rate is as good as they state. If I can fire up photoshop and replace the subject with The Hulk and it still gets flagged. That is the discrepancy that is confusing.
I'd LIKE to say that I ate something exotic on the deck of a yacht while hanging out with Kanye in the Azores living my best life, instagram, selfie, besties, like whatever, etc. BUT......I had a boring ole turkey sandwich with side of chips and an apple while watching the local news on TV. Oh well.
There is an answer to that, and it is quite complicated. The short version is: there is indeed a public and private version of reality.
Well, Apple is different. They are the ones pretending to be concerned with privacy at all costs. And have millions upon millions of followers who actually believe it, for no other reason than they say so.
And let's not kid ourselves...
The "three letter" agencies will be lining up with demands
In my opinion, they already have, and already do.
Just because they claim to and make it part of their marketing, does not mean they actually do.
Proponents of this system should think about the missing question in this FAQ: “Is the CSAM system effective?”.
The answer is “No”. It doesn’t prevent children from being abused. It doesn’t prevent the creation of new CSAM. It doesn’t even prevent CSAM from being shared.
Someone in possession of CSAM would simply disable iCloud Photos which also disables the detection system. They can still share it using websites and apps and they can even spread it through iCloud Drive by encrypting it before uploading.
In short, Apple introduces a system which is known beforehand to be completely useless for its intended purpose. So what is Apple’s real intention?
The answer is “No”. It doesn’t prevent children from being abused. It doesn’t prevent the creation of new CSAM. It doesn’t even prevent CSAM from being shared.
Someone in possession of CSAM would simply disable iCloud Photos which also disables the detection system. They can still share it using websites and apps and they can even spread it through iCloud Drive by encrypting it before uploading.
In short, Apple introduces a system which is known beforehand to be completely useless for its intended purpose. So what is Apple’s real intention?
You want to see two pictures that do match regarding the hash? - here you go.
Hey Mr. Cook, we got a match!
Yes, I am aware, that both are NOT in that database, but they obviously match. So: If it is not allowed to have pictures of women in a white shirt, do not try to have that butterfly in your library...
Pictures originate from:
If it is a problem, publishing the pictures themselves here, please remove that post.
Hey Mr. Cook, we got a match!
Yes, I am aware, that both are NOT in that database, but they obviously match. So: If it is not allowed to have pictures of women in a white shirt, do not try to have that butterfly in your library...
Pictures originate from:
If it is a problem, publishing the pictures themselves here, please remove that post.
Last edited:
Thank you, and you bring up a different framing of my scenario which helps somewhat with my perspective.
(Sidenote - I'm not the one that asked about banks, but agree with you on that.)
That said... Yes they're already in my space. And no, I don't know everything they're doing in there. I don't worry about that. I can only go off what they tell us and trust what they tell us based on their track record (one of your previous points if I recall). Also, as you stated, other initiatives have had the option to opt out with no functionality loss.
But to date, they haven't used my space in this way. I can't think of anything they're knowingly doing in "my space" that behaves like this.
I'm not even worried about the "slippery slope" or conspiracy theory based concerns. They're simply using my space to do more than they have in the past, and telling me they're going to put an unreadable sticky note on my fridge without my permission, and it will stay unreadable as long as I stop using one of their better services. I have nothing to worry about with that sticky note. But I like my fridge how I like it - don't put a sticky note on there without me being ok with it, just because someone else deserves to have that sticky note clutter up their fridge.
That's the mentality I think many are coming from, for better or worse... Is it subtle? Sure. Is it too dogmatic? Maybe. But it's a legitimate thought process.
Apple does care about their user's privacy in democracies. It's just that they shot themselves in the foot by introducing CSAM in the US.
There would be less of an outcry if Apple rolled this out in an authoritarian state such as China.
Google does not install spyware on your device that sifts through your files. Everybody understands that if you choose to upload data to the cloud (i.e. someone else's computer) without first encrypting it, they can access it and have the right to keep illegal material off of their servers. What Apple has implemented is fundamentally different and new. Your own device is now treating you like a suspected criminal and may report you if Apple's secret algorithm thinks it sees something "suspicious". And yes, if they expand (or are forced to expand) the use of the infrastructure they built, it can absolutely undermine end-to-end encryption.
Apple's claims that they will "not accede" to government demands are ridiculous. Of course they will accede when either forced by law or threatened with severe financial repercussions. We have already seen that in China, for example.
Oh great thank you! This was my worry but you put pictures to my thousands of words. Exactly this. An image can be a match even if it’s unrelated. Especially with Apple’s claims that modification to the images will also be a match, this is more concerning.
You’re right. But I can’t half run!
In all serious, we are all entitled to our opinions and in this case can’t find a common ground. That’s just the way it goes.
I do wonder about this. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything possible to slow down / hinder / catch child predators. But if it can be turned off anyway (unlike server side scanning), how much does it truly help? Doesn't that essentially make it somewhat of an opt-out feature from the criminal's mindset?
🤣
Breaking news: Apple is inside our iPhones! And we can’t arbitrarily ”remove code” as we like from an OS we only have a license to use and we do not own! And maybe Apple will decide to add a couple more megabytes (for the hashes database) to the “System” storage space on the iPhone! Shocking!
Some people..
I have to say, I find it really disconcerting that this is the issue that suddenly so many people think Apple is overstepping. A million things you let go. But Apple decides to start doing what ever other major provider does, and not allowing iMessage to continue to be a safe haven for child porn...and that generates outrage?
The reaction alone tells me this is probably something Apple really does need to do.
The reaction alone tells me this is probably something Apple really does need to do.
I’m honored we have the Interpol director here on the forum, I didn’t know.
Good evening sir.
Well I don’t think that’s fair. I don’t use Facebook and Twitter for other privacy things too.
Also a criminal is probably going to use a fake name, with fake address and itunes gift card for payment. Does apple even verify ID for accounts?