Apple Publishes FAQ to Address Concerns About CSAM Detection and Messages Scanning

[q64ceo]

America was founded to have the freedoms you gladly give up for a shiny new gadget. I think maybe those of you who don't love freedom should go somewhere you can be monitored at all times and executed for speaking the wrong thing or loving the wrong person. The freedom you enjoy was paid with blood and toil, yet you give it away as if it was nothing. Members of my family died in both the American and the French revolutions and I have no pity for those of you shilling for the loss of those freedoms. Privacy is a right.

MUH RIGHTS!

 

[MozMan68]

MUH RIGHTS!

I was picturing this when I read those posts…

 

[Tooldog]

Ad homonym attacks will not deter me. And being accused of a filth is legally actionable... expect it. I could publish my photo albums in a conservative church. That isn't the issue is it? You desire control. Its easy, don't buy Apple products. Google can be locked out, Apple cannot be locked out. That still isn't the issue. I paid for my phone. Its my personal possession.

Let me add that it is inappropriate for Apple employees to post here without explicitly stating they are Apple employees.

 

[BeefCake 15]

We would've suffered less Jared subway commercials if that tech was available years back...

 

[bobdobalina]

It's about bashing Apple. No one yells at Google for their GMail scanning for child sex abuse imagery. But Apple is for some reason different.

Half the people I know have been actively trying to get google out of their lives for years. People don't "bash" google becuase everyone already knows google abuses privacy like it's their mission statement.

People "bash" Apple on privacy because they expect better from Apple.

 

[I7guy]

Any thoughts on where that belief comes from? I feel like we're both kind of stuck with different believes but no real "truth". To you this isn't a change to Apple's approach to PII. To me it is. But we're both kind of making assumptions.

Let's say you're completely right, and this isn't a change. Apple's intent and policy conflicted with my values all along, I misunderstood the policies, and I'm just noticing now. Is that wrong of me? What's important about my error to you?

To be fair, this isn't about right or wrong. Apple has hundreds of millions of customers, each with their own viewpoint. My own viewpoint, which is neither right or wrong, as it's my opinion, is that, although surprising, this does not change Apple fundamental principles with respect the "privacy". Some people might find, scanning for illegal pictures a violation of their privacy, Others not so much.

There is no objective viewpoint, only a multitude of opinions.

 

[turbineseaplane]

MUH RIGHTS!

Don't go there please.

Some of us, liberal and conservative, (I'm much more the former than the latter - for disclosure) tremendously value liberty, freedom and, relevant here, privacy of our own content, thoughts and "data" in general.

Personal privacy and freedom are serious concepts that, to that posters point, millions have died for in sacrifice - that we all benefit from now. The least we can do is attempt to hold those principles they fought so dearly for.

 

[q64ceo]

Don't go there please.

Some of us, liberal and conservative, (I'm much more the former than the latter - for disclosure) tremendously value liberty, freedom and, relevant here, privacy of our own content, thoughts and "data" in general.

Personal privacy and freedom are serious concepts that, to that posters point, millions have died for in sacrifice - that we all benefit from now. The least we can do is attempt to hold those principles they fought so dearly for.

Apple is not part of the federal government. You have no right to privacy on iCloud. If you don't like it, leave the Apple ecosystem. No one is forcing you to be there.

 

[jntdroid]

Apple is not part of the federal government. You have no right to privacy on iCloud. If you don't like it, leave the Apple ecosystem. No one is forcing you to be there.

Precisely why they should only be implementing this on iCloud, and not using our phones to start the hash matching process.

 

[hans1972]

I’m sorry Apple but you are not trustworthy. You and your comrades from the big tech are evil.

But these systems doesn't change that.

You can't now 100% that the existing camera app is not analysing what you are pointing it to and filing reports with Apple piggybacking on other data.

If you don't trust the entity which design much of the hardware, controls most of the firmware, controls the operating system and built-int services, you can't really use their device and services.

You have to switch to someone you trust.

 

[jntdroid]

Dear Tooldog, You do not have the right to maintain child pornography on your device or transmit it physically or digitally…

Hey..this is fun…give me another one!

Dear MozMan68, you do not have the right to defame another human being so you need to let Apple send hashed recordings of all of your conversations to their database of encrypted defamation phrases.

 

[q64ceo]

Precisely why they should only be implementing this on iCloud, and not using our phones to start the hash matching process.

How the technical aspects of this works, I have no idea. I admit that. Do you?

 

[crymimefireworks]

Apple is not part of the federal government. You have no right to privacy on iCloud. If you don't like it, leave the Apple ecosystem. No one is forcing you to be there.

And that we can agree! On my way out of the ecosystem starting this afternoon. Yipee!!

 

[hans1972]

It‘s more about the technology and for what this tech could be used in the future if Apple is forced by law.

Think about all the stuff Apple can to today with the Camera app and the Photos app.

Governments could force Apple to use the already existing face recognition feature in Photos combined with the location of where the photo was taken and where the phone is now to help track criminals and "criminals".

How do you know they aren't this already? The technology is right there and have been for many years.

 

[hans1972]

All three FAQ questions could/should actually be answered with:

"Practically speaking yes, and if we were forced to do so by a government entity you wouldn't know."

This is the problem.

Certain government entities could force Apple today to this with existing stuff in the Camera and Photos app.
How do you know Apple aren't already using face recognition in the Photos app to help China catching Hong Kong demonstrants?

 

[crymimefireworks]

May I suggest that you purchase this as your next phone?

Its got great security and it doesn't spy on you.

Hmm looks like a Windows phone. Maybe you're joking?

Been exploring options with Pinephone and Librem that run Linux. Also exploring the de-Googled Android releases.

 

[jntdroid]

How the technical aspects of this works, I have no idea. I admit that. Do you?

I'm not sure what you mean. Do I have the same level of technical knowledge as those that created this system? No. Do I have a solid understanding of how Apple is implementing this, and why they chose to do it this way vs. doing it on iCloud? Yes. I actually fully understand why they chose this method vs doing it all on iCloud. Is that what you're asking?

 

[crymimefireworks]

Think about all the stuff Apple can to today with the Camera app and the Photos app.

Governments could force Apple to use the already existing face recognition feature in Photos combined with the location of where the photo was taken and where the phone is now to help track criminals and "criminals".

How do you know they aren't this already? The technology is right there and have been for many years.

That's a great question. The way I see it I go to Apple for two things:
1. Transparency about privacy practices (i.e. "here's what we're doing")
2. Anti-surveillance practices that align with my values (i.e. "Mind your own business", Do Not Track)

With this new CASM policy, Apple is doing a commendable job at #1, even to the point of saying the system will expand over time. However, we no longer agree on point #2.

If #1 were under threat that would be a bad day indeed. Reminds me of the PRISM stuff.

 

[hans1972]

I find it really scary how many people on this forum defend Apple for this technology. I fear the day when governments will dictate to Apple what images to search for to make it easier for them to track down certain people (like people in China who want a democracy or homosexual people who enter places in Poland's LGBT-free zones).

You don't understand the technology.

The already existing face recognition feature in the Photos app is much better for what you describe.

How do you know Apple isn't already doing this for Poland?

 

[crymimefireworks]

To be fair, this isn't about right or wrong. Apple has hundreds of millions of customers, each with their own viewpoint. My own viewpoint, which is neither right or wrong, as it's my opinion, is that, although surprising, this does not change Apple fundamental principles with respect the "privacy". Some people might find, scanning for illegal pictures a violation of their privacy, Others not so much.

There is no objective viewpoint, only a multitude of opinions.

Sounds about right to me! Appreciate the perspective.

 

[hans1972]

The problem is, it isn't just "privacy" being mishandled by relatively transparent democratic governments that is at issue here, the real problem is that this technology can and will be weaponized by repressive governments around the world. Apple can deny it all they want but they have already demonstrated that they can and will bend to the CCP when their continued business in China is on the line. If you live within the reach of the PRC or even work in an Asia-adjacent field you should be concerned about this.

You should be much more worried about the face and item recognition built in the Photos app.
Its much better to catch people doing illegal stuff.

Instead you worry about a new way which is more inefficient than what is already on the iPhone.

 

[hans1972]

Well, I dony use any cloud services not to be subjected to slicing and dicing. And I would like to avoid that on my device as well. I understand that using "apple servers" comes with strings attached (same for google, Microsoft etc etc) but I would like my device to be "snooping free". That is my main point here. Apart of that I do not believe that it will have any measurable impact on child pornography and only creates tools for further privacy invasion.

You do know that your Photos analyses every Photo you take? All your photos are analysed so heavily and resource intensive that the iPhone only does it while connected to power for the most part.

 

[hans1972]

Time to ditch Apple I think. This is setting a very spooky precedent on a slippery slope.

Is this guaranteed to go ahead? Is there a way to opt-out or circumvent it?

Just disable iCloud Photo Library.

You can even use Google Photos if you want your photos scanned on Google's servers.

Of course, there is no way to stop the Photos app for doing a lot of analysing and scanning of every photo you take. But that has been going on for over a decade so you are probably OK with that.

 

[JamesTheo]

Just another reason to start shopping for an Android. I'm all for punishing child sexual abusers, but this is way out of line. So when your kids grab your phone and start taking pictures of your 3 year old hugging a full-sized doll, is this what will get flagged? No thanks!

 

[turbineseaplane]

Apple should offer a way to disable all scanning of your photos on your devices as a result of the changes here.

I would absolutely - very happily - give up all scanning of my content.
I don't care at all about the face detection or the "making of memories", etc.