I would only wonder why wouldn’t you question everything? Aside from those things that have an easily verified “physical” basis, I mean? If they say “iMessage is encrypted”, that’s just them and they don’t go out of their way to provide details. So, do you not question that?
I trust anything verifiable. I am automatically skeptical of anything that doesn't fit a normal progression or customer demand. I don't question their tech specs or how products work in general. If they say the government isn't monitoring/capturing traffic to their datacenters...I question that because they could easily be held in a mandate to say that.
I can see why you’d say there’s no benefit to them and not a selling point for the masses when they say there is a benefit to them and a selling point for the masses. Because, after all, that’s just them saying it’s a benefit to them and a selling point for the masses and if you don’t trust that and discount it, then of course there’s no benefit.
In the end, though, if he continues his employment at Apple knowing how bad it is, isn’t he a part of the problem by allowing it to continue and not addressing it with the full authority of his position? I mean, sure, that one time he helped one lower level person resolve a customer issue, but, at his position, he’s just picking and choosing issues to get involved in rather than improving the processes all around, which he has the power to do.
That's correct. Supposedly, if you're not backing up to iCloud, then it isn't checking. However, once this system is in place, do we really expect it to not be exploited by governments/hackers to peek at our data regardless of whether we're uploading to iCloud or not?
Why would they? This isn't 1984 - we are not all obligated to assist the enforcers. Amber Alerts are one of the worst...convincing people that kids are being abducted left and right. It just isn't so. The vast majority of Amber Alerts are domestic disputes where the non-custodial parent is late returning the kid from visitation and it gets reported as "abduction".
The problem with this line of thinking is that Apple can already do what you're worried about. They control the entire software stack, and if they want to snoop on your phone they can.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303And, considering that Apple has never said that iCloud Photos are end-to-end encrypted, that wouldn’t factor into this anyway! You moved the goalposts of iCloud Photos being end-to-end encrypted (and they’re not), I’m just moving them back to where they were to start with.
Correct. Unfortunately, not E2E. The speculation when all this originally happened was the new scanning method was a precursor to turning on E2E for photos. At this point we may never know.
Once again, if the fear is 'nation state will force Apple to do X', then the game is already over. If you think a nation state will secretly get Apple to search for things other than the audited CSAM hashes just prior to going to iCloud, why can't they secretly get Apple to do that now?
Why would someone make up ******** like this about Amber Alerts? There's only 150 to 200 Amber Alerts per year in the whole country. They are only issued when law enforcement believes there is an imminent danger of physical harm to the child. Not because someone is late.
Because they want to?
We know that they would even hand over their surveillance video to the authorities. That’s the reality of today, even if you really wish they wouldn’t.Agreed. And I would imagine that those who benefit from those “free choices” are happy for the involvement of otherwise unaffected persons.
End to End according to that page means:
To be clear, they ARE performing scans using the CSAM hashes on all the images they’re storing in the cloud. It’s a part of being an image hosting company, especially if you want to avoid prosecution. Apple would DEFINITELY tell everyone if they moved the hash scanning to the devices because it’d be a part of a big new privacy feature… E2E encryption for iCloud Photos. With that enabled, even if a government request came in, even if someone were to social engineer an Apple employee, they still wouldn’t get any images.
Better hope you don’t have kids that decide to be intrigued by sex and do their own research like I did when I was 13, bc I did not want to see pictures of older looking people, I looked for examples of other kids my own age. Luckily those were the days before the internet was just another extension of the police state.
So, because citizens didn’t push back to stop ‘The Patriot Act’ and its intrusions into privacy, you use that as a reason to not push back when they attempt it again?
How does this CSAM thing protect any children from abuse? All it does is prevent (or catch) those who upload existing, already-known-offending, images. And that’s with the charitable assumption it’s never abused and no one ever gets setup using it.