Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This is the part that concerns me. If the Neural Hashing and Matching operated as you have described, the incidence of false positives would be low. Having set the match to 30 plays against this assumption. It lends credence to the concern that it is not as accurate as communicated. Whether this could be applied to a series of photos or just the random shot, unless Apple is willing to disclose the details or let the user know about the flagged photos, we won't know.

That is a concern.
A lot of things could be assumed by their choice of 30. Maybe there’s an incredibly high number of pedophiles. Set the number to low and it may be two much work for Apple to sift through (kind of scary with that assumption). Obviously you have to have some threshold. I would suggest thinking that the 30 is just a starting point. Maybe its perfect and yet maybe after in place for a bit the data will slide the number up or down. Its two early to tell. I don’t really want to assume anything personally about the 30 because it needs more data in a real world scenario to tell if its supporting the initiative to squash the images from being on their servers.

Also remember that you’re assumption is just that. You, and also everyone else, don’t have all the data points. Maybe Apple doesn’t know what this will do. Take a read through the link I provided and see if it elaborates.
 
For those of us wondering as to the path Nation States will push Apple ...
Do you have more information supporting your theory (genuenly asking for more information)? A country requiring companies to store data they operate in locally really isn’t all that new or uncommon of an idea. China lately gets all the attention on this subject. The power it gives the country by requiring this is so they can request information from the company because the data resides in their boarders. I live in the US but this doesn’t really seem like a big ask of any country.

However, from what I understand, that doesn’t force Apple to collect personal data. So if Apple doesn’t ever collect it then the government can request all they want and their response would be sorry we don’t collect that. That doesn’t exist to give to you. You know we don’t because you operate our servers. Our software doesn’t collect it.

The flip side of the coin is it does mean they can request data Apple does collect. Given Apple‘s privacy stance I doubt much of it is personal information and if its encrypted Apple has stood its ground on not providing/creating tools to decrypt it. Also this may be one of the reasons they chose to perform this kind of system on the device. If it only exists on the customer’s device then the Chinese government can’t request the information on the customer’s phone.

These are good questions you’re presenting. Your choices on what you choose to put on your device and also out on the internet will affect you. A lot of them are governed by the laws in the country. All the more important to keep vigilant on what you decide to put out there.

Also the article you linked was kind of vague and leading. I tried to follow the link it referenced and it was behind a pay wall. It was more trying to paint a picture of fear (not an invalid concern) with its limited information. It reads like its intentionally leaving information out so you’ll form an idea of something really negative which drives clicks. It really sucks to read these kind of articles because they should be labeled editorial or opinion piece because they don’t state any hard facts and I really want those when I make a decision. It also stinks because folks often don’t read the full details and point to it like ’see this is what I mean’ as if it was factual information.
 
I'm curious to see how this will unfold. Personally, the implementation of this "security" system will have no impact on me but it is something I will not accept. Scanning documents on iCloud for illegal images is fine by me but implementing it on the device (no matter the limited scope) is beyond the pale in my opinion no matter what the intended purpose is. However, Apple certainly has the right to implement the feature if it doesn't violate any laws. And consumers have the right to choose. The government shouldn't intervene and let consumers choose. Personally, I will opt out and sell any Apple devices that implement this "feature".
First let me commend you on casting your vote in about the only way most of us can. With our wallets. I won’t even go down the alley that jumping to another platform is probably doing the same or worse. You have to make a stance somehow and its important that you’ve made yours.

However you are the 2nd person who said they would be okay with scanning iCloud but not their phone. This always seems odd to me because I prefer things to happen and stay on my phone. If its done on the server you can’t control it at all, however on your phone you can simply turn the feature off.

I clearly swing in the other direction on this topic but would like to hear your view so that I have as wide of a perspective as I can.
 
However you are the 2nd person who said they would be okay with scanning iCloud but not their phone. This always seems odd to me because I prefer things to happen and stay on my phone. If its done on the server you can’t control it at all, however on your phone you can simply turn the feature off.
Because I don't want an on-device scanning tool installed that could be hacked for nefarious purposes no matter how small the chances of that happening. On top of that, look at the state of this country (USA). People are being publicly humiliated and losing their jobs over emails and tweets dug up from their past or simply expressing their opinion on a subject. Imagine the power individuals, corporations, countries can wield over their fellow citizens if they collected (or created) info that could be fed to the "woke" mob.

I will go back to a dumbphone for personal use if necessary. It will be a huge annoyance but it is what it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ladybug and BurgDog
Because I don't want an on-device scanning tool installed that could be hacked for nefarious purposes no matter how small the chances of that happening. On top of that, look at the state of this country (USA). People are being publicly humiliated and losing their jobs over emails and tweets dug up from their past or simply expressing their opinion on a subject. Imagine the power individuals, corporations, countries can wield over their fellow citizens if they collected (or created) info that could be fed to the "woke" mob.

I will go back to a dumbphone for personal use if necessary. It will be a huge annoyance but it is what it is.
I don’t know if you use an iPhone right now but it already does scan your information. Spotlight reads all of your meta data (PDF, text msgs, apps, etc) and photos already scans all your images (also adds it to spotlight). If you do have an iPhone go ahead and search for dog, grass, food, road, mountain, baby, or child in spotlight. Its been doing this for years. How is it you’re not already concerned that someone could hack this data which is scanning your device and storing it locally on your phone all the time. In fact as Apple has gotten better about scanning for new information (on device) photos you’ve taken have received these features. This is also on Android phones and many computers.

Not saying you shouldn’t dumb down your technology if you’re not comfortable with that. You’d have to go back to some windows XP or macOS 10.3 as spotlight was implemented in 10.4. Or am I not fully understanding your answer. I do apologize if I’m being dumb.
 
How is it you’re not already concerned that someone could hack this data which is scanning your device and storing it locally on your phone all the time. In fact as Apple has gotten better about scanning for new information (on device) photos you’ve taken have received these features. This is also on Android phones and many computers.
It's clear from your response to my post and to others that you just don't understand our perspective or simply don't want to. Yes, the spotlight feature already indexes the data on my iPhone and Mac and could theoretically be hacked and used if they got access to my devices. I already don't like that and try to manage that by limiting the access I can via settings and taking measures to keep my devices secure. When using any tech you do the best to limit access to your data to maintain privacy and security. Why would I want to have another "feature" installed that could be used to scan my data for specific photos to report back to some company or government agency? I'm guessing your viewpoint seems to be that since I am already at risk of getting hacked why not accept an additional possible backdoor for the "good" of society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and BurgDog
It's clear from your response to my post and to others that you just don't understand our perspective or simply don't want to. Yes, the spotlight feature already indexes the data on my iPhone and Mac and could theoretically be hacked and used if they got access to my devices. I already don't like that and try to manage that by limiting the access I can via settings and taking measures to keep my devices secure. When using any tech you do the best to limit access to your data to maintain privacy and security. Why would I want to have another "feature" installed that could be used to scan my data for specific photos to report back to some company or government agency? I'm guessing your viewpoint seems to be that since I am already at risk of getting hacked why not accept an additional possible backdoor for the "good" of society.
You’re correct that I didn’t understand, which is why I asked. I was more concerned though that you weren’t aware that it was already happening in other areas. It helps that you explained that you‘re also uncomfortable with those features that are already present. Because if you were okay with these features and didn’t regulate their use than it would seem very ignorant and hypocritical. However you’ve been making concessions to use technology and this is just another that is invading into that space you’re not okay with.

Like you may not be a fan of your good buddy borrowing tools from you but he’s your buddy so you allow it. But then they borrow another, and another, and so on. Next they are borrowing your ATV and so its like you should’ve drawn the line with the wrench but now you have to have the conversation that they‘ve gone to far and actually you’ve never really been okay with it. Not entirely accurate but similar.

Now many of these features are controllable by you on the device. Does having the control/ability to turn off or opt out of any/all of these features alleviate them existing for you. I understand you are just speaking for yourself but may share concepts with others. I think I asked my question properly but to be sure. If all these features (hypothetical) that invade your space of privacy can be 100% controlled by you. Are you still opposed or are you okay with because other people can choose to use it but you will disable it. Life for me has been about all kinds of concessions. You can’t make everyone happy and sometimes things that are right will piss off the majority, or if they are wrong will piss off the majority. However I think there’s room for discussing the details of the space you come from and trying to find a common ground. Also thank you for answering my previous question.
 
I am using a Galaxy SII (yes, S II )

Works 100%, all day battery (removable as well) and doesn't support Google services anymore (they kil't it in Gingerbread in 2017) but everything from apps to visual voicemail to texts to web browsing, reading PDFs and Kindle books, etc work.

It not only pre-dates 'the cloud' by a couple of years, it also pre-dates the 'contact tracing' stuff which is its own privacy issue that I want no part in. Go ahead, Walmart, just try to prove I'm vaccinated or unvaccinated! Here's my phone. Oh? you can't find it? oh well, can't ask me to leave without presuming that I'm unvaccinated but it's quite possible I am, so would you be willing to take that risk? no? Alright then!

I feel more prepared for the future now than I was with my de-googled S20 FE. I'm also immune to CSAM scanning being used for other purposes.

2010-11-30-cw0557.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and WriteNow
I don’t know if you use an iPhone right now but it already does scan your information. Spotlight reads all of your meta data (PDF, text msgs, apps, etc) and photos already scans all your images (also adds it to spotlight). If you do have an iPhone go ahead and search for dog, grass, food, road, mountain, baby, or child in spotlight. Its been doing this for years. How is it you’re not already concerned that someone could hack this data which is scanning your device and storing it locally on your phone all the time. In fact as Apple has gotten better about scanning for new information (on device) photos you’ve taken have received these features. This is also on Android phones and many computers.

Not saying you shouldn’t dumb down your technology if you’re not comfortable with that. You’d have to go back to some windows XP or macOS 10.3 as spotlight was implemented in 10.4. Or am I not fully understanding your answer. I do apologize if I’m being dumb.
It would be safe to assume that many, as do I, turn off Spotlight, don't use "find my phone (and hence me)", don't have location turned on all the time, and many more so called conveniences that are more beneficial to the bottom line of Apple and others in the GAFA oligopoly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
I've been putting the location OFF (and saving cities in Weather manually and scrolling between them as I travel) for years. I only toggle 'wifi and mobile data networks' when navigating (always turn off GOOGLE on Android) but these days my navigation is being done with a Garmin Nuvi from 2013. Offline, no internet needed and no privacy issues. I personally like how it routes me since it avoids the worst busiest highways. Trying to use 'no highways' in either Apple or Google maps tends to take too many creepy backroads where you kinda expect banjos to play. Garmin is more balanced.

I can still use "Maps" (in Android 2.3, it wasn't yet Google branded!) if I still wanted to.

One thing I'm struggling with currently on Linux is disabling Google search's ability to define my location via IP address. On my ancient Android (which feels more like a futuristic one!) the browsers show 'location: unavailable' which I prefer. On Firefox though, even with geo.enabled set to FALSE and everything set to not track, and even turning location permissions and cookies off for Google's website, it still has me pinged via IP address. And this is an old Firefox too, from 2013.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Playfoot
I've been putting the location OFF (and saving cities in Weather manually and scrolling between them as I travel) for years. I only toggle 'wifi and mobile data networks' when navigating (always turn off GOOGLE on Android) but these days my navigation is being done with a Garmin Nuvi from 2013. Offline, no internet needed and no privacy issues. I personally like how it routes me since it avoids the worst busiest highways. Trying to use 'no highways' in either Apple or Google maps tends to take too many creepy backroads where you kinda expect banjos to play. Garmin is more balanced.

I can still use "Maps" (in Android 2.3, it wasn't yet Google branded!) if I still wanted to.

One thing I'm struggling with currently on Linux is disabling Google search's ability to define my location via IP address. On my ancient Android (which feels more like a futuristic one!) the browsers show 'location: unavailable' which I prefer. On Firefox though, even with geo.enabled set to FALSE and everything set to not track, and even turning location permissions and cookies off for Google's website, it still has me pinged via IP address. And this is an old Firefox too, from 2013.
Though we would both be on different sides of this discussion I commend you for having the mental stamina to navigate around all the different privacy/tracking issues that have popped up over the years.
 
It would be safe to assume that many, as do I, turn off Spotlight, don't use "find my phone (and hence me)", don't have location turned on all the time, and many more so called conveniences that are more beneficial to the bottom line of Apple and others in the GAFA oligopoly.
Thats great. I’m all about having a choice in controlling the different features of your device and there are many. Since this article is about Apple system for finding CSAM and the feature is able to be disabled wouldn’t this also be something that you’d be turning off? From your point of view is it bad that Apple is providing this feature to everyone even though you can control it? If so, why?
 
Thats great. I’m all about having a choice in controlling the different features of your device and there are many. Since this article is about Apple system for finding CSAM and the feature is able to be disabled wouldn’t this also be something that you’d be turning off? From your point of view is it bad that Apple is providing this feature to everyone even though you can control it? If so, why?
If I might interject, we can only turn off Apple's proposed surveillance software (if it is implemented) by not uploading photo's to iCloud, so we lose functionality if we turn it off. Thus, the CSAM scanning is not an added 'feature', but a prerequisite for using Apple's services.
 
but Raebo we are not talking about speeding devices or building inspections apple just want to check photo libraries to see if certian images are there. if someone proposes speed devices lets debet that then by the way they already exist, they call them speed cameras over here :-(
Get a warrant or at least have probable cause. Don’t go looking assuming I’m guilty. Screw speed cameras and their extortion, too. Make my family pay a fine for doing 35 MPH in a 35 MPH (no, that’s not a typo). Try to fight it and get points on your license.

Thanks 1284814, i was just asking, we are not talking about brain scan watchlists isn't that you scare mongering?
Yes, i don't want people to know my bank details but what is their on photographs you are concerned about, i'm not being judgemental just asking
as for scaning devices i thought this was the position "Yes, stopping iOS 15 from scanning your photos is rather straightforward. All you have to do is stop uploading your photos to iCloud and you are good to go. Apple has confirmed that the check is performed only if you have opted to upload your photos to iCloud"
Got a challenge for you. Try to sync your entire photo library without iCloud. “All you have to do is stop using a cell phone” is what it really says.

It‘s the principle of the whole thing that we object to. Isn’t it bad enough we get stalked online (and increasingly offline) by these companies? Stay out of our devices. If Apple wants to scan for this stuff, scan shared photos only, and do it 100% on-server like everyone else does. Crossing the device line is very dangerous for society.
 
If Apple's goal is to keep this stuff off their servers, they'd just use their on-device scanner and reject any matches from ever leaving the device, notifying the user what is happening. Current plan is instead to let 30 or so images accumulate on Apple's servers from a user, images Apple doesn't want there in the first place and shouldn't even allow as they are illegal to knowingly possess, then call the cops on the uploader once there is enough for a case to be made.

Stated goals and way to achieve it don't match. Usually this means there is a hidden goal the means actually support. Basically the actually goal is for Apple to get people Apple doesn't like arrested, not stop illegal images from collecting on their servers. That is the real purpose of Apples new surveillance tool being added to all devices- to act as an adjunct to law enforcement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pummers
Makes me glad I never used 'the cloud' ever. I knew it was overrated the instant all the older cloud services starting EOLing one affer another, then another forum a user lost their entire MP3 library they 'backed up' to a cloud service because the RIAA took issue with it (a predecessor to copyright ID?).

I'm old fashioned but I just keep a laptop or server going, use them to download all my purchases, then copy them via MicroUSB to the Androids. Helps that all of them are old enough to still support USB Mass Storage mode. Not sure what Google were thinking with that MTP crap.

So far everything I'm using, from laptop to tablets to smartphones stop at the year 2013. I just prefer the older UI which to me still looks and feels light years ahead of whatever 'modern' is today. I really adore my Galaxy SII. Everything 'just works' so well.
 
If Apple's goal is to keep this stuff off their servers, they'd just use their on-device scanner and reject any matches from ever leaving the device, notifying the user what is happening. Current plan is instead to let 30 or so images accumulate on Apple's servers from a user, images Apple doesn't want there in the first place and shouldn't even allow as they are illegal to knowingly possess, then call the cops on the uploader once there is enough for a case to be made.

Stated goals and way to achieve it don't match. Usually this means there is a hidden goal the means actually support. Basically the actually goal is for Apple to get people Apple doesn't like arrested, not stop illegal images from collecting on their servers. That is the real purpose of Apples new surveillance tool being added to all devices- to act as an adjunct to law enforcement.
You raise some interesting points. The server does keep tabs on number of matches, which it will fuzz with a few fakes, but any account greater than 0 is technically knowingly storing on Apple's part as they can see the match counts. So, their own, convoluted system could actually be illegal by waiting to get a number of matches first.

This is one more argument to only check photos that are shared with other people through iCloud and handle them as they are discovered, maybe as a 3-strike system. 1st strike is AI detection, stopping the share action, and removing the illegal imagery from the iCloud photo library (but not the user devices). This action could be appealed by the user and sent to Apple's human review, and the photos restored if they were a false-positive, or the user reported if they are legit CSAM. If no appeal and the user tries again, 2nd strike with same process. If user tries a 3rd time, they get sent to Apple's human review and their account disabled until that process is complete. Maybe even at this time, Apple looks at the entire photo library stored in iCloud. The strike count has a rolling 6-month total, so that if a strike reaches the 6-month mark, it is removed from the user's account. At each strike though, the photos attempted to be shared are blocked from being shared and removed from the user's iCloud library (the photos on-device get a cloud icon to show they aren't synced just like songs and files get when there's a problem). The user gets an email stating the share action was blocked and they can appeal it each time it happens. With this, Apple shouldn't care (or know) if any or how much illegal content is simply stored in the iCloud Photo Library. This catches people that actively try to share it through iCloud. Once something is shared with another person, iCloud then becomes a host.

To me, I figured Apple's announcement had to be part of some bigger initiative. What are the odds that the EU, Australia, and Apple all decided to fight CSAM in the same month?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurgDog
If I might interject, we can only turn off Apple's proposed surveillance software (if it is implemented) by not uploading photo's to iCloud, so we lose functionality if we turn it off. Thus, the CSAM scanning is not an added 'feature', but a prerequisite for using Apple's services.
This is very true. I’m aware of the loss of this other feature. I think another goal of Apple’s was to ensure thier iCloud servers were not holding any illegal photos. This in turn required them to make this a requirement of the new feature they intend to add.

Some in this forum have argued that they should scan their iCloud servers for the illegal images. Which for me would seem even more of a privacy issue because at that point you can’t turn the feature off at all if you’ve uploaded any photos in the past but thats just my opinion.

It seems Apple wants to do a couple things. One they want to get illegal images off their servers. Second they want to deter people from using it going forward for illegal photos. I think their quite aware of how many people they may lose on this new feature. Since they said they don’t want people’s data and personal information under their control, this seems to fit the theme. Folks still can back up their photos to their computers and to other online servers (that are likely also doing something like this). However there’s still choice. When ever you add layers of security you’ll add inconvenience in some form. I suspect this is something they feel very strongly about to impose this inconvenience on customers who used the service.

So when they approached the issue of dealing with illegal images on their servers and they wanted to give people the choice to turn it on or off for themselves. Doing it on device seems to be one of the few solutions. Not one that makes everyone happy by far but still a choice the customer chooses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VulchR
This is very true. I’m aware of the loss of this other feature. I think another goal of Apple’s was to ensure thier iCloud servers were not holding any illegal photos. This in turn required them to make this a requirement of the new feature they intend to add.

Some in this forum have argued that they should scan their iCloud servers for the illegal images. Which for me would seem even more of a privacy issue because at that point you can’t turn the feature off at all if you’ve uploaded any photos in the past but thats just my opinion.

It seems Apple wants to do a couple things. One they want to get illegal images off their servers. Second they want to deter people from using it going forward for illegal photos. I think their quite aware of how many people they may lose on this new feature. Since they said they don’t want people’s data and personal information under their control, this seems to fit the theme. Folks still can back up their photos to their computers and to other online servers (that are likely also doing something like this). However there’s still choice. When ever you add layers of security you’ll add inconvenience in some form. I suspect this is something they feel very strongly about to impose this inconvenience on customers who used the service.

So when they approached the issue of dealing with illegal images on their servers and they wanted to give people the choice to turn it on or off for themselves. Doing it on device seems to be one of the few solutions. Not one that makes everyone happy by far but still a choice the customer chooses.
Hybrid device/server scanning or cloud-only scanning, the end result is the same. One must turn off iCloud Photo Library to not be subject to it. Cloud-only scanning is much safer because:

1. Apple doesn't open Pandora's Box by crossing the device line.
2. High degree of certainty that my photos aren't being scanned for illegal content regardless (the phone can still scan and check even without iCloud, the results just don't go anywhere).
3. Apple can technically do whatever it wants with our iCloud data right now. Photos, documents, and numerous other data types are not E2E encrypted.
 
Hybrid device/server scanning or cloud-only scanning, the end result is the same. One must turn off iCloud Photo Library to not be subject to it. Cloud-only scanning is much safer because:

1. Apple doesn't open Pandora's Box by crossing the device line.
2. High degree of certainty that my photos aren't being scanned for illegal content regardless (the phone can still scan and check even without iCloud, the results just don't go anywhere).
3. Apple can technically do whatever it wants with our iCloud data right now. Photos, documents, and numerous other data types are not E2E encrypted.
The thing is scanning is already happening on your device. Spotlight and meta data on your phone. Search for dog or child in photos it will show those types of photos. What’s to stop apple from adding confederate flag or whatever.

The neural hash system only creates hashes if you turn the iCloud photos back up on your own. By your definition they crossed that line over a decade ago.

I agree server side choice of scanning given to the customer would be a nice option and allow for you to use iCloud photos backup. I don’t know if this is why but it doesn’t scale very well when you do it server side. I also don’t know but many presume Apple chose this route so they can encrypted all of iCloud including photos. Doing device side scales much more and still in your control.

I think you’ve got great points though. Something more hybrid with even more choices.
 
Believe me, with cancel culture and many sites banning even so much as questioning say the Covid lockdowns I would not be the least bit surprised if this tech can also be used to find and weed out those who question the government or dissent or anything else. That's my own issue with it. I being a vegan also engage in online activism and given the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act exists, and those who so much as criticize the meat and dairy industry qualifies as Animal Enterprise Terrorism, they can use this type of scan to find folks like myself who's only crime is advocating animal rights.

Believe me, Apple is setting the precedent with this. Even if they don't go through with it, it would not be a stretch to suggest that Samsung, Microsoft or anyone else might go ahead with it but be all hush hush about it. Took Microsoft a long time to admit that Windows 10 telemetry was a thing.

What concens me is that people used to defend and stand up to guys such as Edward Snowden. Today, sadly he's become a joke like John Mcafee or Alex Jones despite being absolutely correct about his concerns.
 
The thing is scanning is already happening on your device. Spotlight and meta data on your phone. Search for dog or child in photos it will show those types of photos. What’s to stop apple from adding confederate flag or whatever.

The neural hash system only creates hashes if you turn the iCloud photos back up on your own. By your definition they crossed that line over a decade ago.

I agree server side choice of scanning given to the customer would be a nice option and allow for you to use iCloud photos backup. I don’t know if this is why but it doesn’t scale very well when you do it server side. I also don’t know but many presume Apple chose this route so they can encrypted all of iCloud including photos. Doing device side scales much more and still in your control.

I think you’ve got great points though. Something more hybrid with even more choices.
Spotlight indexing is a different beast. Each device performs its own index and it never leaves the device. The intention behind it is also different. Every OS with a search feature has indexing as a time and energy saver. This is lifted directly from library index cards, where thumbing through a couple drawers of 3.5"x5" index cards saves an enormous amount of time and energy compared to walking every aisle of what could be a very large library in search of one book. Computers use indexing to scan a few MB database instead of pouring through Gigabytes if not Terabytes of raw data on the drive to search for a calculator program.

There are a lot of things where being on-device increases privacy/security. CSAM detection is not one of those things. Apple definitely had blinders on when designing this system to not see where it leads and the myriad weak points. You know that if Apple rolls this out, other companies and governments will 100% use it as an excuse to increase surveillance drastically, whether it be for the children, for national security, or to better serve you ads. The thing that really concerns me is the fact that Apple can't even verify the databases aren't being abused until accounts start getting flagged. How could they not see the corner they backed themselves into for something they're not legally obligated to do?

The device line I'm talking about is code to actively search for illegal content. Microsoft's system to warn about possible malicious software is there for my protection, not to report to the authorities that I'm using unsigned software. Antivirus software is actually a compromise on performance and trust for protection against accidental clicks. Some diligence and clever settings nullify most of the need for antivirus software. Apple's Photo Object Recognition is there so when I search for cars, I get pictures with cars in them. In the same effect, though, photo search is kinda weak in what it can search for (thankfully). Apple's CSAM detection is like a TSA strip search each time you take a picture, just truly invasive with the goal of looking for something to use against you in a court of law. Sure 99% of people pass through with nothing found, but how does that actually feel to go through that process?

I would rather we never gain E2EE iCloud if it means being subject to continuous photo library scanning on my device for undesirable content. I'd rather trust Apple with my non-E2EE data than to have to trust a government (or two) to not seed a database and try to arrest me (or anyone) for wrongthink. That said, Apple hasn't mentioned one thing about increasing encryption within iCloud, just the process it takes to decrypt the added security vouchers. With the way the software is nowadays, without iCloud sync, there's little reason to stay with Apple products if you have multiple devices. It's much easier to break out of the default and roll my own solution on de-Googled Android and Linux. With these operating systems, integrating an E2E encrypted Nextcloud instance to sync my data is way simpler than doing it with an iPhone and iPad. Nextcloud on Android can do a straight folder/file sync to the camera roll and music folder. That's why several people threatened to jump from Apple entirely if they implement this scanning system, myself included. Without iCloud, Apple devices just become good hardware running severely crippled operating systems. I was ready to pull the trigger on a Pixel 5 running CalyxOS when Apple announced they were suspending the rollout of CSAM detection. I had already built a new desktop computer and researched Nextcloud hosts at that time, too.

Truth be told, there is an immense amount of trust inherent to using Apple products. I would've thought someone were from another dimension had they told me how far into Apple's ecosystem I'd currently be back in 2019. Back then, I fought to keep iOS 9 on my iPhone SE, had iCloud turned off, most data toggles off, had Siri disabled, physically removed/blocked the cameras, and kept all my devices siloed. Dropbox hosting public pictures for an owners forum I belong to was the extent of cloud services I used. Now, I currently sync everything through iCloud, have 4 HomePods, use Apple Pay, and drive a connected car.
 
Last edited:
Hybrid device/server scanning or cloud-only scanning, the end result is the same. One must turn off iCloud Photo Library to not be subject to it. Cloud-only scanning is much safer because:

1. Apple doesn't open Pandora's Box by crossing the device line.
2. High degree of certainty that my photos aren't being scanned for illegal content regardless (the phone can still scan and check even without iCloud, the results just don't go anywhere).
3. Apple can technically do whatever it wants with our iCloud data right now. Photos, documents, and numerous other data types are not E2E encrypted.

@TheToolGuide - Not fully correct.
There are other ways to load photos into the iCloud without using the on device iCloud photo backup feature.
Matter of fact Apple’s design deliberately leaves this wide open and allows the current material to propagate.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.