Apple expanding child safety features across iMessage, Siri, iCloud Photos

1235»

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 97
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,082member
    Rayz2016 said:
    elijahg said:
    This probably also means eventually (if not already) Apple is scanning data that goes through iCloud Private Relay. Why try and force every ISP to scan people's data when they can by default pass it all through an Apple server? One hell of a lot easier to have a single point to collect data from.
    Mmmm 🤔

    The ISPs would surely be a better bet. This will only trap Apple users. What about Windows and Android users?
    With end-to-end-encryption becoming the norm there's very little ISPs will be able to do.  On-device monitoring is really the only workable option for automatic detection.
  • Reply 82 of 97
    omasouomasou Posts: 261member
    Have people read the article.? It is NOT pattern matching it is matching KNOWN CSAM hashes against user image hashes. If FOUND and if CONFIRMED Apple is notifying the authorities.

    https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Technical_Summary.pdf

    Basically if you have CSAM don't store it on Apple servers or devices. If you do have CSAM shame on you and get help.

    If you go outdoors, say the airport and probably many other places, your face is being scanned and matched against know terrorists. If you drive by a local cop your license plate is being scanned and compared against a list of stolen vehicles. Get use to it. An no it is not a violation of privacy when you are out in the public, just like putting your trash can out for collection.
    edited August 7
  • Reply 83 of 97
    If any company has earned its customers' trust, it's Apple. They've had very public battles with the US government over access to user data, which they've shown a commitment to protect. I see nothing wrong with this Child Protection program. It's not a "backdoor"; it's not government overreach. It's protecting children from predators. I'm all for that. I mean, if a mom has photos of her toddlers in the bathtub, that's not going to be flagged because it's not in the CSAM database. If a predator tries to distribute ch!ldp*rn, then Apple won't know the contents, but the users involved will be held accountable. If the transaction goes through, and the images exist in the CSAM database, ONLY then will the authorities be notified. If it turns out to be a false positive, there is an appeals process.
    No system is perfect, and if/when this is implemented, there will be bugs that Apple will have to work out. As there is an appeals process that users can access BEFORE the authorities are notified. I don't imagine a raft of innocents going to prison as a result of this system going active. I DO see a reduction in predators exploiting children, and that is a good thing.
    I'm disappointed in the EFF's stance on this. They should know better.
  • Reply 84 of 97
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    edited August 10
  • Reply 85 of 97
    I’ve already signed out of off iCloud   This will be my last iPhone if this isn’t reversed.  Told everyone I see at work about this invasion of privacy.  Lots of stunned faces.  People outside of here aren’t happy either.   Reversal coming soon

    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  
    edited August 10
  • Reply 86 of 97
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,316administrator
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works, where the data comes from, the legal limitations on the database and the organization it comes from, Apple's legal obligations, and other assorted limitations.

    And you're right. You do own your computer hardware. What you do not own is your operating system - you only license that. So, I wouldn't be handing out straw man argument points just yet.
    edited August 10 Detnator
  • Reply 87 of 97
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works and it's limitations.

    Source of the data?  What source did I quote?  You're still not using facts in your ad-hominem attacks.  I am going to stop feeding the troll now, best of luck to you.
  • Reply 88 of 97
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,316administrator
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works and it's limitations.

    Source of the data?  What source did I quote?  You're still not using facts in your ad-hominem attacks.  I am going to stop feeding the troll now, best of luck to you.
    " A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially." <== this is from your post.

    The NCMEC has the data, and is the supplier of same. It is not the US federal government, and does not get the images that the hashes are made from, from them.
    edited August 10
  • Reply 89 of 97
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works and it's limitations.

    Source of the data?  What source did I quote?  You're still not using facts in your ad-hominem attacks.  I am going to stop feeding the troll now, best of luck to you.
    " A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially." <== this is from your post.

    The NCMEC has the data, and is the supplier of same. It is not the US federal government, and does not get the images that the hashes are made from, from them.


    Really?  The NCMEC is both an entity of and an agent of the the US Government according to the 10th circuit.  PDF alert in the second link.



  • Reply 90 of 97
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,316administrator
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works and it's limitations.

    Source of the data?  What source did I quote?  You're still not using facts in your ad-hominem attacks.  I am going to stop feeding the troll now, best of luck to you.
    " A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially." <== this is from your post.

    The NCMEC has the data, and is the supplier of same. It is not the US federal government, and does not get the images that the hashes are made from, from them.


    Really?  The NCMEC is both an entity of and an agent of the the US Government according to the 10th circuit.  PDF alert in the second link.



    Keep reading, and I apologize for not speaking clearly enough, as it is a busy day here at work. The NCMEC has firewalls and carve-outs in law and data provisions and it collects its data on its own. The NCMEC is a 401c3, nonprofit, too. The legal rulings are basically "deputized by" legality, in much the same way that I was a "government agency" when dealing with the chemistry on a reactor in the '90s.

    https://www.missingkids.org/footer/about <= NCMEC's webpage.

    Specifically, as that 401c3 it has those firewalls and carve-outs so it can collect the data, and provide these databases to Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox, and nearly everybody else, WITHOUT intrusion from other agencies like DHS, and potential ACTUAL violations of the fourth.

    I'm not interested in starting a beef here. You're welcome to believe what you want, as it pertains to the system, who's secretly feeding data to it, what Apple MIGHT want to do with it, what COULD happen in the future, and any assorted array of future problems that may or may not erupt. When and if those things do happen, we'll report on them. 
    edited August 10
  • Reply 91 of 97
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    aguyinatx said:
    It's terrifying that Apple is allowing the government to bypass legal restrictions that would have made this type of search unlawful.  I am not defending criminals or pedos but I strongly object to the government having unlimited insight into the photos on personal devices.  A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially.
    Read the article and Apple's explainer about it, and understand the technology behind it better.

    This is not something that the database can be fed an image of a dime-bag, and it will universally pick out all the dime-bags, unilaterally.
    I read the article, and I'll bet that I understand the technology well enough to have this conversation without worrying.  The database can be fed any image, and "can't" is being used as a pseudonym of "won't".   If you'd like I'll give you a thirty minute primer on how image recognition works with AI, or maybe OpenCV too for kicks.  Any image that the neural net is trained on can be be scanned for.  Your response is technically, practically and actually incorrect.

    Oh, and you didn't address a single point that I made.  I own my computer and it should be 100% up to me to determine what files are allowed to be opened and for what reason.  You do get 10 bonus points for a really good straw man.
    Well, considering you got the source of the data wrong from the jump, I'm not so inclined to accept your 30-minute primer.

    Your response is based on what you want to believe, not how the system works and it's limitations.

    Source of the data?  What source did I quote?  You're still not using facts in your ad-hominem attacks.  I am going to stop feeding the troll now, best of luck to you.
    " A list of hashes is exactly that, and that list could be expanded to anything the government would like as I strongly assume the the government is providing the hashes to Apple initially." <== this is from your post.

    The NCMEC has the data, and is the supplier of same. It is not the US federal government, and does not get the images that the hashes are made from, from them.


    Really?  The NCMEC is both an entity of and an agent of the the US Government according to the 10th circuit.  PDF alert in the second link.



    Keep reading, and I apologize for not speaking clearly enough, as it is a busy day here at work. The NCMEC has firewalls and carve-outs in law and data provisions and it collects its data on its own. The NCMEC is a 401c3, nonprofit, too. The legal rulings are basically "deputized by" legality, in much the same way that I was a "government agency" when dealing with the chemistry on a reactor in the '90s.

    https://www.missingkids.org/footer/about <= NCMEC's webpage.

    Specifically, as that 401c3 it has those firewalls and carve-outs so it can collect the data, and provide these databases to Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Dropbox, and nearly everybody else, WITHOUT intrusion from other agencies like DHS, and potential ACTUAL violations of the fourth.

    I'm not interested in starting a beef here. You're welcome to believe what you want, as it pertains to the system, who's secretly feeding data to it, what Apple MIGHT want to do with it, what COULD happen in the future, and any assorted array of future problems that may or may not erupt. When and if those things do happen, we'll report on them. 

    https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2021/08/apple-adds-a-backdoor-to-imesssage-and-icloud-storage.html

  • Reply 92 of 97


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
  • Reply 93 of 97
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,300member


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
    In some ways Google actually IS ensuring your privacy more so than Apple, removing themselves from the equation altogether with some services so that while they could still receive court orders to turn over certain sensitive data and communications that belong to you they factually cannot comply. It would just be an unintelligible code soup that Google has no keys to decrypt. They factually cannot access it, you are the one 100% in control.

    It's all in all a mixed bag. A mash-up of both would be ideal IMO, and it fairness the two companies are moving closer to the same privacy points. 
    There's a lot of changes underway at both companies. 
    edited August 10
  • Reply 94 of 97


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
    Google and Microsoft and Android never stood up and beat their chest about what happens on your phone stays on Your phone.  We all know that we have little privacy anymore.  At least Google tells you that the are using you for payment.  

    Apple screwed up here.  Try to advertise about your privacy stance now lol.  They sold out.  Nothing else 

    aplle can scan my pics all day once they are one the Apple servers.  Not a moment before hand.  Not when qued to go.  Only after they go 
    edited August 10
  • Reply 95 of 97
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,082member


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
    Google and Microsoft and Android never stood up and beat their chest about what happens on your phone stays on Your phone.  We all know that we have little privacy anymore.  At least Google tells you that the are using you for payment.  

    Apple screwed up here.  Try to advertise about your privacy stance now lol.  They sold out.  Nothing else 

    aplle can scan my pics all day once they are one the Apple servers.  Not a moment before hand.  Not when qued to go.  Only after they go 
    Why?  What actual real world difference does it make that you would be having such an intense reaction?
  • Reply 96 of 97
    crowley said:


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
    Google and Microsoft and Android never stood up and beat their chest about what happens on your phone stays on Your phone.  We all know that we have little privacy anymore.  At least Google tells you that the are using you for payment.  

    Apple screwed up here.  Try to advertise about your privacy stance now lol.  They sold out.  Nothing else 

    aplle can scan my pics all day once they are one the Apple servers.  Not a moment before hand.  Not when qued to go.  Only after they go 
    Why?  What actual real world difference does it make that you would be having such an intense reaction?
    Why?   It’s not their phone. I own it.  I won’t allow the install on my 11PM.   Staying in iOS 14 until this is reversed.  Give it a month.   Apple hates bad press.  They haven’t seen bad press like this in ages if ever. Far worse than the battery throttling press. The sold out. Now we know the whole “privacy” angle was a lie 
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 97 of 97
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,082member
    crowley said:


    Stay the hell out of MY phone.  

    What's the alternative? You think Android/Google respects your privacy more? Mining and exploiting your data is literally their business plan.
    Google and Microsoft and Android never stood up and beat their chest about what happens on your phone stays on Your phone.  We all know that we have little privacy anymore.  At least Google tells you that the are using you for payment.  

    Apple screwed up here.  Try to advertise about your privacy stance now lol.  They sold out.  Nothing else 

    aplle can scan my pics all day once they are one the Apple servers.  Not a moment before hand.  Not when qued to go.  Only after they go 
    Why?  What actual real world difference does it make that you would be having such an intense reaction?
    Why?   It’s not their phone. I own it.  I won’t allow the install on my 11PM.   Staying in iOS 14 until this is reversed.  Give it a month.   Apple hates bad press.  They haven’t seen bad press like this in ages if ever. Far worse than the battery throttling press. The sold out. Now we know the whole “privacy” angle was a lie 
    But this just seems entirely arbitrary.  It's the photo that is being scanned, not the phone, so what actual difference does it make whether it's scanned on the phone or the server?

    The privacy angle wasn't a lie.  It just has a single highly controlled and limited exception when it comes to ensuring Apple's services aren't being used for the storage of illegal images of child abuse.  There is no business advantage to Apple in doing this, nor any violation of any trust, save the trust of child abusers which I for one don't put much stock in.  Apple's privacy stance is intact.
    edited August 10 Detnator
Sign In or Register to comment.