This is like saying, why vote? My vote means nothing.
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
Yep!
We seem to have some "eager for authoritarianism" members around these parts for some reason.
So ironic and contradictory:
Apple says, “This process is secure, and is expressly designed to preserve user privacy.”
Apple says, “This process is secure, and is expressly designed to preserve user privacy.”
IRONY:
Every Iphone upgrading to IOS 15 will contain child pornography
From Apple:
”Instead of scanning images in the cloud, the system performs on-device matching using a database of known CSAM image hashes provided by NCMEC and other child-safety organizations. Apple further transforms this database into an unreadable set of hashes, which is securely stored on users’ devices.”
Every Iphone upgrading to IOS 15 will contain child pornography
From Apple:
”Instead of scanning images in the cloud, the system performs on-device matching using a database of known CSAM image hashes provided by NCMEC and other child-safety organizations. Apple further transforms this database into an unreadable set of hashes, which is securely stored on users’ devices.”
I don't see any concern because we've all seen how Apple stands up for privacy, and has pushed back against demands for "backdoor access" very publicly. I don't see this being a wavering of that stance in any way.
Double-encryption, comparision to KNOWN hashes, which are then hashed again, so they can't be linked back to the originals. There are many layers involved here that protect privacy.
Even though they haven't published the exact thresholds, they have stated that the thresholds are "very high", and I believe that. So the chances of false-positives will be extremely low, if any at all.
The funny thing is that we all WANT scanning of our photos for features like face detection, depth, effects, etc. Yet when that scanning is used to protect children and vulnerable people, suddenly it's a privacy invasion? Sorry folks, we can't have it both ways.
Apple is innocent until proven guilt. They've done their due dilegence to ensure this is a safe and well-designed system. I choose to believe that.
Double-encryption, comparision to KNOWN hashes, which are then hashed again, so they can't be linked back to the originals. There are many layers involved here that protect privacy.
Even though they haven't published the exact thresholds, they have stated that the thresholds are "very high", and I believe that. So the chances of false-positives will be extremely low, if any at all.
The funny thing is that we all WANT scanning of our photos for features like face detection, depth, effects, etc. Yet when that scanning is used to protect children and vulnerable people, suddenly it's a privacy invasion? Sorry folks, we can't have it both ways.
Apple is innocent until proven guilt. They've done their due dilegence to ensure this is a safe and well-designed system. I choose to believe that.
Oh come on now, you know that's not the same as what they're doing here.
Cook is an engineer, IIRC, not that his background is in any way relevant to this discussion.
Apple has squandered all trust with this.
I imagine this is because all the stakeholders involved are looking at this solely through the lens of protecting children from abuse... when you're looking at it from solely that angle (which no one can argue is not a good goal) then you gloss over the secondary effects of "having to follow the local law" from repressive regimes (e.g. China) for the sake of your primary objective that you're filtering with your lens.
Plus years later when some dissents "disappear" and it's linked to your policies and platform you can always claim "we have to comply with local laws in the regions we operate as do our users"... the blowback from that is less than the potential general population blowback from "child abuse ring sharing contents using Apple devices... Apple could have stopped this with a hash check"
There are many countries where homosexuality is punishable by death. There are many countries where treason or speaking out against the government is punishable by massive jail terms or again, death.
What happens when somewhere like Saudi Arabia demands Apple to include hashes onto all phones sold there that relate to homosexual content, or to use their on device scanning of images to include any potential homosexual content? What happens when China includes hashes of Winnie the Pooh images?
This is a massive slippery slope, and is being pushed through under the guise of CSAM which most of us in the Western world quite rightly feel very strongly about, in the hope that people won't speak out against it.
What happens when somewhere like Saudi Arabia demands Apple to include hashes onto all phones sold there that relate to homosexual content, or to use their on device scanning of images to include any potential homosexual content? What happens when China includes hashes of Winnie the Pooh images?
This is a massive slippery slope, and is being pushed through under the guise of CSAM which most of us in the Western world quite rightly feel very strongly about, in the hope that people won't speak out against it.
Tell that to the young man found hung in Belarus now presumed murder which allegedly may be because of the totalitarian regime there. I doubt his followers fighting for their human rights to have their phones scanned by anyone because any door can be abused and i Imagine Lukashenko's government will relish this new opening in Apples iPhones. Nothing like this ever works as stated, it will either ruin some family because of the scan making a mistake (it happens) or images being planted on iPhones (I can see that happening in nasty divorces let alone state sponsored acts to bring down their targets) or worse still extending what governments can have access to via this method down the road.
I am saddened to say but I wont be using iOS 15 or buying a new iPhone. The repetitive 'if you've got nothing to hide' does not apply here, because its so blinkered. this is a much bigger picture we are talking about and just because its Apple means nothing as far as security/privacy. We have seen zero day exploits on their phones with iOS 14 quite a lot, and the bigger hacks by major bad actors from different countries, I get the feeling CSAM scanning will make it easier tbh even though we all want to see criminals stopped, this is not the way. A door is a door with a lock, and all locks get picked eventually, and so called AI is a fledgling tech that's seriously open to abuse I feel. Its just a matter of time before this goes badly wrong. I guess the FBI, NSA, GCHQ and other assorted acronyms have been pushing hard enough so Apple had to give in somehow.
I hear you...I'm a firm proponent of vote with your dollars. But Google is doing the same thing.
There may be some other Linux type phones that don't "Presume guilty", but they may not be to your liking.
Maybe you can show me example China sentence someone for holding Winne the Pooh image?
Or maybe you are just blowing things out of proportion?
Maybe he was a murder. How can you tell he is not. Just because Belarus is so called authoritarian nation in your eye, doesn’t mean he is automatically innocent.
Apple said they are obligated to report CP, so maybe it is because they have to. Everything can be interpreted in different ways. If you are suspicious for everything, maybe anything can be conspiracy theory.
P.S. I believe all phone manufacturers will have something similar to this in the future. You’d better buy a iPhone 12 Pro Max now, you probably aren’t going to buy new phone anymore
World is dangerous out there, as father of one year old, I am fully onboard with this. Tell parent who lost their kid, tell murder victim, that law enforcement can’t access criminal’s phone because of so called privacy. **** this.
Last edited:
In the end, still no. Apple very well knows they could be under pressure from governments outside the US and US government agencies to look at image hash tags besides CSAM. That isn't a slippery slope, that's a proverbial cliff. 😒
Well, you're the only one that downvoted my original post out of 10 or so votes, so maybe, just maybe you are missing something in your critical thinking. Or maybe, your working off emotion like a lot of people are trained to do in school. Of course, people like that (I don't know you are one of them) were not trained to think critically, so maybe its not your fault.
Nobody has an objective view on what constitutes the best view of critical thinking, which is why imo that post deserves a down vote.
Basically the post is just another form of a slippery slope argument, which is nothing more than speculation.
I'm not sure where speculation = critical thinking and is that what is being taught in school today?
If you are going to skip reading, then please at least read the last paragraph.
The problem that you are not considering is that this action by Apple will not do anything concrete. It will not make your 1 year old safer. I know that is hard to hear. I know that you desperately what to make the world as safe as possible. You are a new parent, it is expected. But you are willingly giving up liberty for a sense of security that means no real security for your child in the long run.
Why will this not work? Because criminals will figure it out and not post images where they can be detected. In the mean time, a bunch of false positives will ruin innocent lives, a few stupid criminals that were no real threat to your child will be caught, and the politicians will make more headlines that make them look good but don't change anything. Well, other than give some people (that don't think too hard) a false sense of security.
It is more likely that down the road, your child will get on the wrong side of politics or support a cause that the then current political environment does not support and use this lack of privacy to punish them. This is the REAL danger to your child when they come of age and they are out of your protective envelope.
Think of it this way and I am not implying any political view on your part. But consider that some politician gets elected by an overwhelming majority of the people. Along with this election both houses of congress go to this political party. And consider that this political party succeeds in reversing the laws regarding, for example, abortion and gay rights. Now consider that your child grows up to be gay or is female and has an abortion. You really want everything on your childs phone subject to unrestricted inspection by Apple (which also means the government). Politics swings both ways and while you may think you are totally in tune with current political correctness, it may not always be this way. Just look at how major tech companies are punishing political dissidents in the US today. You may agree with it today, but will you always?
The last thing you don't want to hear is that it is your responsibility to protect your child right now, not the government's or Apple's. 90 percent of abused children know their abuser. Look it up. The risk that your child will become a victim of child abuse from outside the family is not practically different than, for example, the risk of getting in a fatal car wreck. It is a statistic until it happens to you or your family, then it is not. There are just some things you cannot foresee or protect your family from. In fact, if you are honest with yourself, I think that you would rather have your child abused and alive, rather than dead from a fatal car wreck. What are you doing to stop fatal car wrecks?
New laws do not make the world safer. Increased monitoring of innocent people do not make the world safer. There is simply too much irrelevant information and AI is too easy to abuse to make population wide monitoring a real problem solver.
Stop thinking about yourself and what will make you feel better today and start thinking about your future adult child and the world they will grow up in. Do you want them to be able to freely express their opinion no matter what or not? If not, then they are destined to just be a ward of the state no matter how old they are. You really what your adult child not to be able to draw certain things, or think certain things unless they are approved by the government.
It is dissidents that make the world a better place. It happened in the 60's with the war, civil rights, and later with gay rights. These things would NEVER have happened if the government had the power you are advocating giving them today. Just stop to think about that.
Anyone who bought them to "belong" has a few screws loose.
I'm very happy with my Apple products, but anyone who bought them to look smarter, isn't.
well said. I do wonder from a tech point of view how members of the Linux and Unix community are taking Apple's behavior lately. Linus must be having a stroke at this point.. I can only imagine the language he would be using.
Actually they do have an objective view. One such example is "Disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence" (from Wikipedia). A slippery slope argument does not require evidence, rationality, or open-mindedness, but rather relies on conjuncture or speculation.
Which is exactly the definition of the post quoted. Because the future can't proved and is hence speculation -- along the lines of the slippery slope.
(And while I may agree, one thing can lead to another...there is no proof of that. And it may be there are different definitions of what is disciplined, rational, informed and evidential.)
Once you have a clear indication of a "slippery slope" - you are already past the point of no return "down that slope"
You can't really put the toothpaste back in the tube on stuff like this.
Once the infrastructure and norms are in place on the OS to do this sort of scanning against datasets, it will always be there and then be getting used with little to no fanfare - very quietly...
...just as many regimes and agencies and the like would prefer...
And as Apple has admitted - they will have to do what local jurisdictions demand.
The better solution would be "don't build tools to help them out to begin with"
It's disturbing that they are going the opposite road instead.
No matter what the phraseology and I agree, there is no future proof of any additional functionality on top of this, which was my original point and why the OP was speculation and/or slippery slope.