I don’t see anyone complaining about Google’s program that’s a bit more invasive
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.
Craig Federighi Acknowledges Confusion Around Apple Child Safety Features and Explains New Details About Safeguards
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To be fair you sort of expect that out of Google not Apple.
That assumes that it will be limited to images. Eventually the system will not look just at pictures, but also at App activity that cannot be seen from the data in iCloud.
It sounds like a bunch of people are just mad at legislation passed in 2018. Y’all can be mad if you want, but it’s a tad late to be upset about it.
True. But the complaints ring hollow for only pointing out one company’s compliance with a law versus another
So I suspect the debate is going to be, do people like Apple's or Google's version of complying with the CSAM laws in regards to cloud storage.
1) Where did you get your statistics then. The idea that 70% of women and 50% of men were sexually abused as children sounds absolutely insane to me.
2) We are talking about child sexual abuse here, not whether an individual feels that their parents emotionally abused them. Apple isn't scanning for that anyways (yet). If you got your 70% statistic by including that, your statement was false. I'd also like to see your source for that.
Its about spying on private devices by Apple for now. Apple scanning their servers would not be the same problem.
No, it isn't. Arguably, some emotional abuse may be subjective. But sexual abuse is not subjective.
Please stop with this ish.
Psst... there's a whole world outside the US, in case you've forgotten.
They get an image tagged "this is child porn" and they still store it on their servers. Sounds like they are not making any effort at all. Courts will likely agree that they are not making a good faith effort when they ignore the blatant tagging. What they should be doing is forwarding the image with proper identifying info to the proper authorities in the jurisdiction of the uploader and then deleting it.
Required to remove child pornography doesn't imply must actively search for it.False. See FOSTA-SESTA legislation
From the legal analysis:
“Additionally, FOSTA-SESTAputs further conditions on the applicability of 230, and platforms very much are legally required to remove child pornography.”
What Section 230 Is and Does -- Yet Another Explanation of One of the Internet's Most Important Laws
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes internet platforms from any liability as a publisher or speaker for third-partywww.publicknowledge.org
The federal statues governing child pornography explicitly says providers (such as Apple) don't have to actively search for it. They do have to report it when they become aware.
Saying I was unaware of child porn on my personal storage systems doesn't get me off the hook for possession. Same should apply to Apple on their storage. Particularly when they are notified that the image is child porn when it is uploaded to storage they own.
We must be reading different comments. I'm on page 12 of 25 and haven't read a single comment about kids bath pics yet. I did read many of those on previous articles on this subject, but not in comments going with this article.
Transparent?
Being transparent would have been discussing this at WWDC and working with independent agencies and security research groups to come up with best practices.
If they want or need to scan for this type of content by law, they need to do it on their servers like everyone else does.
iCloud Photo Library is not E2EE and they've made no commitments to do that.
Scan on the server please.
Obviously there is no evidence yet of something that hasn't been made yet. Now that pandora's box has been opened, nothing will stop state actors from demanding such access.
Actually, the opposite is true. They are only required to act if they are “knowingly” aware of illegal content. Until they started looking at it, they could not knowingly be aware of any of it, unless reported by someone. By now routinely inspecting all content, they lose their 230 immunity because now they are “knowingly” aware of ALL iCloud Photos content.
It's not.
When the CSAM Detection system scans the photo, the photo is in an unencrypted state. There is no encryption to break.
When the system creates the safety voucher, again the photo is in an unencrypted state. The safety voucher which includes a derivative of the unencrypted photo, is encrypted with a secret key unknown to Apple and only known to the device and not the user. But every safety voucher contains part of the key necessary to unlock this encryption. When Apple has collected enough safety voucher, they have enough of the key to unencrypt all the safety vouchers and then read the pictures within them.
No encryption was broken since the encryption was employed to allow only Apple to read it. If the user or some one else can read the vouchers, then encryption was broken.
When iOS sends the regular photo to iCloud Photo Library its encrypted with two keys, one held by the user and one held by Apple. This means that both Apple and the user can read the content. Encryption is only broken if some else is able to read it.
Encryption != Only I can read it
Last edited:
To side with user privacy, as has claimed to do until now, all they have to do is allow end-to-end encryption of all iCloud content by which they do not have the keys.
It’s the overall ideology he is criticizing. Use your head.
Even more disturbing is that all iPhone users will now be required to store hashes of child porn on phones they own.
Last edited:
If they told us at WWDC or now makes no difference to transparency. Nobody is running a public release version of iOS 15 yet. The system isn’t live at the moment in beta versions of iOS 15. You have an informed choice to not install the system update or of course turn off iCloud Photo Library.
Telling us at WWDC wouldn’t have made one dot of difference. Now had they told after the release of iOS 15 then I’d agree with you. But they didn’t. We’re still at least a month away from release.
I think different people will have different views in regards to scanning on device or scanning on the server. I don’t necessarily disagree with you about doing scans on the server and the server alone. But I’d only want that to be the case if it was possible to do it in a way that meant Apple or others couldn’t see my entire photo library. As far as I know that technology doesn’t exist.
You either have to scan everything on the server and share all of your data with Apple. Or the alternative (and the one Apple has gone with) have your device detect CSAM using on device processing. And then share that and only that.
Yeah, reading comments here can feel that “broad public support”.