exceptionhandler

badmonk said:

I suspect CSAM screening will ultimately be performed and confined iCloud server side, like every other cloud based service has been doing for years (and not talked about it).

I always thought iCloud screened for CSAM, after all MSFT and Google have been doing it for years.

Freedom has its limits.

I think they’ve always been scanning iCloud photos and reporting on the server side.  I think someone previously linked to a document that states so.  So the claims about protecting peds is unwarranted, because it will still be done on the server side.  What apple was trying to do was impose/move their house rule (server side) into our houses (iPhones) for whatever reason.

I see no reason for the move.  As some people have previously stated, “maybe Apple is going to e2e encrypt iCloud photos”.  The rub here is that it would not be e2e encrypted either way.  Scanning and reporting necessitates access to the data. E2E encryption is only E2E encryption IFF there is no process to circumvent it (including at either end) to send the data to someone else outside of the authorized recipients intended by the sender.  This very fact alone means that iCloud photos will never be e2e encrypted as Apple needs to do CSAM scanning.

So all things stated, I’m fine with the current state of server side scanning as it’s not on my device and the only way the scanning and reporting applies is IFF you use the service (some may argue that’s the way it would work on device, but that is subject to change, whereas if it’s on the server, they can’t make that change to scan more than what’s sent to iCloud)

Anilu_777 said:

“Install apps from the App Store”. Either this is a duh don’t jailbreak your phone if you’re a journalist in a dangerous country or a prelude to possible alternate App Stores  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

I took this to mean don’t side load apps.  Certain organizations have enterprise certificates which enable side loading in exceptional cases:

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/01/30/apple-has-revoked-facebooks-enterprise-developer-certificates-after-sideload-violations

This can be one source of apps downloadable from outside the App Store.  Another I think is through Test Flight, which gives a developer an avenue to let a small set of users “beta” test an app before it goes onto the App Store.

I’m not against scanning, as the software necessarily needs to be able to read and write images (wouldn’t be useful if it didn’t).  Scanning is just a subset of reading images - it makes it easier for me to find images of particular things.

But to report to a 3rd party of the results of a scan without my consent, that’s what I take issue with.  As long as the data remains on device, scanning is a useful time saving tool.

I also being a concerned parent, probably won’t be handing over a smartphone or tablet to my kids that I don’t have access to.  So this feature is not really useful to me. They have an iPad, but I also have it locked down where the password can’t be changed (and technically at this point, they don’t know the password, so they have to ask to use it).

I guess it could be useful if an unknown number/account sends illicit images to have it blurred out, just in case.

When they are old enough to buy/afford a phone and pay the monthly charges, they can do what they want.

techconc said:

lkrupp said:

And as AppleInsider and Apple have stated, images are not scanned on the device. But you choose to believe it’s a lie because...?

No, images are scanned on device.  What's funny is that people are just getting worked up about this now.  Apple has been scanning images on our devices for a long time.  This isn't the CSAM hash type scanning, this is the machine learning scanning I'm talking about.  That's how we can search for generic things like "dog" or "beach" a get a bunch of relevant pictures from our library.  Where is all of the "slippery slope" type of discussions around that?  Seriously, the level of stupid being raised about this topic is mind numbing. 

It’s not so much the scanning aspect (as the case you speak of uses on device ML), but rather the scanning and reporting.  Of course, images, text, etc will necessarily need to be accessible to the OS and/or specified applications (it has to read and write them after all) , but it’s the unauthorized transmission of that data off device.  I’m ok if Apple wants to scan and report CSAM in the cloud: their service, their prerogative, but we should also recognize then iCloud photos is not completely private and act accordingly because it should be known that those photos will be scanned and potentially shown to individuals you did not intend (accidentally or intentionally).

To put this scanning and potential reporting on the phone, rather than in the service, takes that private space and makes it more public, even if it’s currently only done if you upload to iCloud.

elijahg said:

Not sure why anyone would pay such an absurd amount for this from what is a pretty poorly regarded networking company - when you could get a prosumer solution from a professional networking company like Cisco (Meraki) or Ubiquiti (Unifi) for 1/4 the price; companies with actual networking expertise who write their own network stack with excellent UIs, reliability, security and updates for 5 years+. Or you could get an overpriced Netgear box with a generic version of Linux underneath and a crap GUI that doesn't work properly ontop with 6 months of software support for $1500.

This.  I bought into ubiquiti and I am very pleased with their devices.  I can’t recommend them enough for the right crowd anyway… it’s not exactly plug and play. To me, it was, ymmv.

However, I have recommended other systems for my less technically savvy family members since I’m not always close to support them.  If this be aimed at less technical users, I fear this will be reserved for the upper-middle/upper class because of the price. I can’t imagine there will be a lot of sales of this.  I can think of a few reasons why people would buy this, but they’re not exactly wise or prudent reasons.