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.
Apple Addresses CSAM Detection Concerns, Will Consider Expanding System on Per-Country Basis
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Regardless of how it works, which I feel I understand, this is Apple violating people's 4th amendment rights. Sure, they are not the "State" so therefore they legally can do this. But as a company who claims to be an advocate for user privacy, this capability, however well intended today, and may be used in the future is antithetical to privacy.
If Apple were to apply this technology on device or in the cloud in response to a court order that established probable cause (CSAM or any other illegal activity) to a judge, I would not care how Apple complied with the order. I applaud what they are trying to do, but Apple is not the state, should not act like the state, and should not act on its behalf unless requested to with a court order. One could argue with Apple's stated policy to notify law enforcement that it is in fact acting on behalf of the state without probable cause which is therefore a 4th amendment violation without your explicit consent to search (which surely will be in an updated terms of service you accept by installing iOS 15). As for the eventual future abuse, once the government declares all the anti-government / wrong political speech a national security issue then all 4th amendment considerations will be invalidated anyway.
In fairness to Apple, while potentially improving user privacy e.g. complete encryption of iCloud, iOS 15 capabilities to reduce tracking like Private Relay could be closing doors for law enforcement to establish probable cause and search in accordance with a warrant. A conundrum for sure.
If Apple were to apply this technology on device or in the cloud in response to a court order that established probable cause (CSAM or any other illegal activity) to a judge, I would not care how Apple complied with the order. I applaud what they are trying to do, but Apple is not the state, should not act like the state, and should not act on its behalf unless requested to with a court order. One could argue with Apple's stated policy to notify law enforcement that it is in fact acting on behalf of the state without probable cause which is therefore a 4th amendment violation without your explicit consent to search (which surely will be in an updated terms of service you accept by installing iOS 15). As for the eventual future abuse, once the government declares all the anti-government / wrong political speech a national security issue then all 4th amendment considerations will be invalidated anyway.
In fairness to Apple, while potentially improving user privacy e.g. complete encryption of iCloud, iOS 15 capabilities to reduce tracking like Private Relay could be closing doors for law enforcement to establish probable cause and search in accordance with a warrant. A conundrum for sure.
Last edited:
How about instead of being patronizing you actually help me understand? I clearly said I want to understand, I looked through the documents, I watched some videos. Yet nobody has clarified my examples. How can a modified Picture 1 that matches Picture 2 be a match yet Picture 2 is not a match? If modified picture 1 === picture 2, then picture 2 should clearly have a collision as well. But people are claiming that is 1/1 trillion chance. But the modification will ALWAYS result in a collision. Therefore, this is where the contradiction lies.
But all the responses I get is "oh you just don't know", or "you just too obtuse to understand". THEN EXPLAIN IT! I said I am trying to understand yet nobody is explaining it, but just being utterly patronizing.
Last edited:
On iPhone: Turn off iCloud Photo Library. Use Google Photos (since they scan server side). Not very difficult or cumbersome.
Also the URL-stuff is happening with third party apps too. So if you're banking app is using a URL to retrieve some of. your account data the URL is inspected by the OS. This feature is part of Google Play Services.
I don’t really care if they’re scannin on device or cloud. My issue is this database that will be hashed against. Today it’s CP. that’s ok. But it’s that today. What about a govt that says memes against the leadership need to be flagged. Hate speech needs to be flagged. Ect. That’s worrisome
Apple have been scanning for CP on iCloud servers since (at least) January 2020. Jane Horvath (Apple Senior Director for global privacy) spoke about it at CES in Las Vegas last year.
To be honest, every cloud storage service has been running a variation of Photo DNA for almost a decade.
From reading around the web these past few days, I believe that the device-side scanning (but with AI that's a really poor choice of word) is being implemented by Apple because pretty soon they will encrypt everything that's in iCloud.
Obviously, law enforcement/government would be very unhappy at the inability to search so Apple has announced that AI will look for a match before it reaches Apple's servers.
It's a trade-off. If you want your stuff encrypted by Apple, some AI must inspect it first.
Again, even inspect is a poor choice of word. The AI doesn't actually know what it's looking at. It's just given a set of data with parameters that can be weighted and trained against. I imagine Google have been using Tensor Flow libraries for this. Apple have their own solution but I bet they are using similar technologies.
Also, people saying they're switching to Android is a farce. Every smartphone on the planet will be using device-side inspection within two years. For one, it massively reduces the resource overheads for cloud providers who are more than happy to pass it on to their customers and their devices. It's only starting to happen now because the chips in these phones are finally powerful enough to run complex AI locally.
Last edited:
But let's use the example of China. At anytime since 2008, (when iCloud sort of got started) they could have asked Apple to start scanning server-side for dissident stuff etc - threatening to remove Apple from China if they didn't comply and so forth but that hasn't happened.
Clearly, while Apple feels the need to cosy up to the powers that be to an extent, I do think that they have their own lines drawn in the sand.
Last edited:
You are wrong about Apple already scanning iCloud photos. It's not being done. Horvath said that Apple was working on being able to do that (at the time).
These things don't raise alarms because (1) they are in your benefit (whereas Apple's photo scanning is adversarial, acting under the presumption that you are a potential criminal), (2) they can't silently report you to the government if they find something "suspicious", and (3) they are voluntary and you can turn them off.
Last edited:
Great link! I very much enjoy the wrap up:
"I believe that Apple's solution is too invasive and violates both the letter and the intent of the law. If Apple and NCMEC view me as one of the "screeching voices of the minority", then they are not listening."
There is so much amazing detail in there.
That is truly a must read from someone who knows their stuff on this.
Last edited:
Are we now at the point where Apple's scanning isn't "actual scanning" because it's Apple doing the scanning?
I must admit that this was quite a shock for me to read when it was posted. I refrained from commenting initially to see what others would say and determine how I felt about this, and if it was a serious enough move to cause me to abandon the iPhone as my smartphone of choice (and has been since the iPhone 4 when it became available on my carrier). I have two Macintosh laptops, and a Mac Pro that I have had since 2013. I have been very happy with all of my Apple products. However the MacBook Pro I have no longer supports the current OS, and neither does the Mac Pro (only up to Mojave if you upgrade the GPU and abandon the boot screen). My MacBook Air was purchased for a special purpose at the time and is not a high-spec device being a 2017 model with an i5 processor and 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD.
I purchased my first Macintosh when Apple first released Boot Camp for the Intel-powered iMacs, and I purchased a 20" with 2GB of RAM and upgraded it to 4GB (3 usable) and began learning OS X as I wasn't that excited about Vista. I continued using OS X, and leveraged its stability to run a lab of virtual machines simultaneously, and after Windows 8 was a severe disappointment purchased a Mac Pro as my next workstation. I ordered it maxed out with two hex-core Xeon 3.06GHz processors, a 512 SSD, and put 128GB of RAM into it and have two 27" LED Cinema Displays attached. It to this day has never given me any issues.
When I read the rumors that Apple was going to be moving away from Intel to using their own processors, I immediately presumed their products would no longer meet my needs since I leverage the virtualization of Intel processors and VMware Fusion. I knew the chances if it emulating x86/x64 at a useful speed would be almost impossible. Without the processor supporting native virtualization, I don't see the M1 processors, as fast and efficient as they are, fitting into my needs any longer. I am sure they are great for most Apple users sans customers with specific requirements.
I love my iPhone 11 Pro and have owned all iPhones since the iPhone 4 CDMA, upgraded to a 5S, 6S Plus, X, and now the 11. I had no intention of upgrading to another phone until this one no longer was functional. Now I have decided that my next phone for the first time in a long time will not be an iPhone.
This is going against the very core values that Apple emphasizes about it products. Of course like others I hope and want anyone guilty of committing crimes against children to be caught and tried for their crimes in a court of law and be punished. I do not feel this is an acceptable way to go about it. As we have seen before, an overwhelming number of overreaching pieces of legislation that would be questioned as acceptable, the two common reasons given to convince the public it is in their best interest is because it 1) stops terrorism, or 2) stops child pornography. After all, if you speak up against number 2, it can make people look at you as someone who thinks it is an acceptable practice and gives the entity the best chances of passing overreaching legislation or conduct.
This is not okay. If Apple is going to begin being a nanny, they need to remove the trash off of Apple Music as well that most sane people would not classify as "music" in any way.
I purchased my first Macintosh when Apple first released Boot Camp for the Intel-powered iMacs, and I purchased a 20" with 2GB of RAM and upgraded it to 4GB (3 usable) and began learning OS X as I wasn't that excited about Vista. I continued using OS X, and leveraged its stability to run a lab of virtual machines simultaneously, and after Windows 8 was a severe disappointment purchased a Mac Pro as my next workstation. I ordered it maxed out with two hex-core Xeon 3.06GHz processors, a 512 SSD, and put 128GB of RAM into it and have two 27" LED Cinema Displays attached. It to this day has never given me any issues.
When I read the rumors that Apple was going to be moving away from Intel to using their own processors, I immediately presumed their products would no longer meet my needs since I leverage the virtualization of Intel processors and VMware Fusion. I knew the chances if it emulating x86/x64 at a useful speed would be almost impossible. Without the processor supporting native virtualization, I don't see the M1 processors, as fast and efficient as they are, fitting into my needs any longer. I am sure they are great for most Apple users sans customers with specific requirements.
I love my iPhone 11 Pro and have owned all iPhones since the iPhone 4 CDMA, upgraded to a 5S, 6S Plus, X, and now the 11. I had no intention of upgrading to another phone until this one no longer was functional. Now I have decided that my next phone for the first time in a long time will not be an iPhone.
This is going against the very core values that Apple emphasizes about it products. Of course like others I hope and want anyone guilty of committing crimes against children to be caught and tried for their crimes in a court of law and be punished. I do not feel this is an acceptable way to go about it. As we have seen before, an overwhelming number of overreaching pieces of legislation that would be questioned as acceptable, the two common reasons given to convince the public it is in their best interest is because it 1) stops terrorism, or 2) stops child pornography. After all, if you speak up against number 2, it can make people look at you as someone who thinks it is an acceptable practice and gives the entity the best chances of passing overreaching legislation or conduct.
This is not okay. If Apple is going to begin being a nanny, they need to remove the trash off of Apple Music as well that most sane people would not classify as "music" in any way.
Last edited:
Are you kidding me right now?!? Are you serious? Really? Are you serious?
China believed to have used iPhone exploits to track Uyghur Muslims | AppleInsider
The recently-revealed use of hacked websites to monitor iPhone users, is now reported to have been used by the Chinese government to target the Uyghur Muslim community.appleinsider.com
My grandparents have lived through Hitler and Stalin too. They've taught me a lot and told me a lot of stories.
I don't trust Apple. They'll expand this 'feature' and soon the users that have such pictures on their phones will be reported & arrested too:
![KZ3JVtXv.jpg]()
(MacRumors, please do not ban me. Thank you)
It always starts out with good intentions and then it'll expand but once this "feature" is rolled out it's too late to start fighting.
Yes. I am dead serious. If you get nothing to hide, what are you afraid of?
Your article has show no proof that China actually used iPhone exploit to target Muslim. The whole Muslim story is big fat lie. The intent is use this lie to target China’s growth. There is no hard evidences and I have few friends from Xinjiang. They have told me no such thing.
And show me the proof that China has ever arrest anyone have such image? You have no proof.
It is good intention with good implementation. Talking about blowing things out of proportion.
Ripped right out of "Authoritarian Regime 101"
Do you mind uploading all your photos and providing us a link to check them out?
Documents too if you don't mind....thx
What are you afraid of, right?
In regards to 18 U.S. Code 2258A, I find this very enlightening.
"
(f)Protection of Privacy.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a provider to—
(1)
monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider;
(2)
monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or
(3)
affirmatively search, screen, or scan for facts or circumstances described in sections (a) and (b)."
www.law.cornell.edu
After reading this law, it is clear that to me that the reason Apple is using on device scanning is not to preserve user privacy, but to provide as much information about the user of the device and the chain of user custody of alleged files made in the report as possible. This appears to confirm what I was surmising earlier today.
If Apple is stating that on device scanning is necessary to preserve user privacy, that is a bold face lie.
"
(f)Protection of Privacy.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a provider to—
(1)
monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider;
(2)
monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or
(3)
affirmatively search, screen, or scan for facts or circumstances described in sections (a) and (b)."
18 U.S. Code § 2258A - Reporting requirements of providers
After reading this law, it is clear that to me that the reason Apple is using on device scanning is not to preserve user privacy, but to provide as much information about the user of the device and the chain of user custody of alleged files made in the report as possible. This appears to confirm what I was surmising earlier today.
If Apple is stating that on device scanning is necessary to preserve user privacy, that is a bold face lie.
I don‘t mind, I have nothing really interesting. In fact, you really think cloud storage provider don’t know what you have uploaded? You really don’t think email service providers don’t scan you email?
I have all my documents, photos uploaded to Baidu cloud storage, Chinese based cloud storage provider.
Another question about the practicality and cost of this system;
This is going to be done for all iCloud photos, not just new ones.
Will the algorithm work with and use optimised versions of photos or the original ones?
My phone does not have original photos, only optimised ones. So if it decides to use original ones that will mean downloading the originals, doing the analysis, and then replacing it with the optimised version again.
If so, that’s hundreds of gigs of photos to be downloaded when the system goes live. Will it only do this while on Wi-Fi or will it also use mobile data, instantly wiping it all out?
This is going to be done for all iCloud photos, not just new ones.
Will the algorithm work with and use optimised versions of photos or the original ones?
My phone does not have original photos, only optimised ones. So if it decides to use original ones that will mean downloading the originals, doing the analysis, and then replacing it with the optimised version again.
If so, that’s hundreds of gigs of photos to be downloaded when the system goes live. Will it only do this while on Wi-Fi or will it also use mobile data, instantly wiping it all out?
I won’t be installing ios 15 in that case. This is completely against the privacy that Apple used to espouse. They’re no different to Samesung or the commie phone companies.
How embarrassing… I read the article wrong 😳🙈The following article should help clarify.
Apple Confirms Detection of Child Sexual Abuse Material is Disabled When iCloud Photos is Turned Off
Apple today announced that iOS 15 and iPadOS 15 will see the introduction of a new method for detecting child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on iPhones...www.macrumors.com
Why would it need to download photos already stored on iCloud Photo Library if Apple (presumably) could already scan them right now?
What bothers me is that they still scan and match hashes on your device. Even with iCloud Photos disabled. That shouldn't be happening without our choice. And I get that they can't make something like this 'opt in', or it would be completely pointless since criminals would simply opt out. But then that gets me back to this point - just do it on iCloud instead of on my device... all of the other companies are doing this already. Nobody would have a problem with it - generally speaking, anyway.
Nothing new except Apple poking it’s head out with this. This can of worms has already been opened and only getting exponentially more concerning. The ramifications are wide-spread and will only get more concerning as the technologies behind this advance.
This is Apple being upfront with this, but let’s not kid ourselves that other companies or nation states are not already implementing something similar without a press release. And not just images. The silver lining is that because Apple is doing it, it will genergy more attention and hopefully wake more people up.
This is Apple being upfront with this, but let’s not kid ourselves that other companies or nation states are not already implementing something similar without a press release. And not just images. The silver lining is that because Apple is doing it, it will genergy more attention and hopefully wake more people up.
Until one day this does not limit to iCloud storage.
Or, until the other day this does not limit to CSAM.
Or, until the other day this does not limit to CSAM.