Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

giggles

macrumors 65816
Dec 15, 2012
1,048
1,277
Stay classy, Tim Sweeney.

These Epic and Facebook executives have no shame in spreading misinformation, and they DO understand the technical part of this.

Disgraceful, gross.
 

09872738

Cancelled
Feb 12, 2005
1,270
2,124
I just take the position of "innocent until proven guilty," and many of you take the opposite.
Not exactly. I agree on the „innocent until proven guilty“ part though. Its just that Apple themselves just admitted to be guilty
 
Last edited:

Expos of 1969

Contributor
Aug 25, 2013
4,741
9,257
I guess I just don’t care enough if people look at my pictures. You can see my dog, my food, places I’ve traveled. Heck I post some of these of different suicidal media sites anyways. Why are people so freaked out about someone seeing your pictures. If that’s the case you either have some skeletons in your closet or you probably shouldn’t be using technology this advanced. Either that or your in the CIA. I am none of those 3, so it just doesn’t bother me.
Wow, difficult to know where to start with folks that feel like you do.
 

orthorim

Suspended
Feb 27, 2008
733
350
No one trusts the government

Why, because they've been lying about everything from since before we all were born.

So Apple having a direct link to some government (or any) agency to censor pix is absolutely ridiculous.

Let's make a mass movement to cancel iCloud subscriptions?! F... that! I have 9.90 / month I will remove.
 

orthorim

Suspended
Feb 27, 2008
733
350
I mean.. actually this blows my mind!

If you remove all the elaborate and verbose framing what is left is this:

The government will provide Apple with a list of undesired pictures. Apple calls the cops if the undesired pictures are on someone's phone.

Whereas, real pedos will tun off sync with iCloud....

WTF
 

Apple_Robert

Contributor
Sep 21, 2012
34,584
50,262
In the middle of several books.
I mean.. actually this blows my mind!

If you remove all the elaborate and verbose framing what is left is this:

The government will provide Apple with a list of undesired pictures. Apple calls the cops if the undesired pictures are on someone's phone.

Whereas, real pedos will tun off sync with iCloud....

WTF
I could be wrong here but, I don't believe Apple has been completely forthright about the purpose of the on device scanning. From what little I know about things thus far, I think Apple is implementing on device scanning with iCloud on, to prevent the sicko from tryin to use the 'I didn't upload that to my iCloud defense.' The scanning on the phone and iCloud probably creates a special account marker that shows the chain of possession and use. In that way, the case against the sick pervert is a little more solid and depending on the action of the pervert, potential distribution charges could be added to the crime(s) involved.
 

SomeSwede

macrumors regular
Feb 26, 2009
108
4
Land of ice and snow.
There was a case here in Sweden a couple of months ago. A homosexual used a cloud service to store pictures of him and his 20 something lover and he got a visit from the police at five in the morning, who gave him a good beating and hauled him off to jail. They wanted to charge him with raping a minor and possession of child pornography.

He was released when he managed to prove that it was his young looking lover on the pictures. And when he tried to press charges for misconduct against the police officers who beat him up, the police basically said that they needed to know who to investigate, but he had no idea who they were since they wore masks.

And all of this because some AI flagged his pictures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane

Expos of 1969

Contributor
Aug 25, 2013
4,741
9,257
I could be wrong here but, I don't believe Apple has been completely forthright about the purpose of the on device scanning. From what little I know about things thus far, I think Apple is implementing on device scanning with iCloud on, to prevent the sicko from tryin to use the 'I didn't upload that to my iCloud defense.' The scanning on the phone and iCloud probably creates a special account marker that shows the chain of possession and use. In that way, the case against the sick pervert is a little more solid and depending on the action of the pervert, potential distribution charges could be added to the crime(s) involved.
How people use their phone and for what purposes is any business of Apples how exactly? This is a key question.

Does Toyota monitor my use of my car in case I may use it as a getwaway car in a bank robbery? Does Jameson monitor where I take my whiskey bottle to ensure I don't let an underage person have a drink?
 

Apple_Robert

Contributor
Sep 21, 2012
34,584
50,262
In the middle of several books.
How people use their phone and for what purposes is any business of Apples how exactly? This is a key question.

Does Toyota monitor my use of my car in case I may use it as a getwaway car in a bank robbery? Does Jameson monitor where I take my whiskey bottle to ensure I don't let an underage person have a drink?
I agree your question is one of the key questions we all need to focus on. My previous reply should not be interpreted as tacit approval for what Apple is doing; it is not.

If my previous guess is accurate, Apple is going to have to be very specific in their TOS, so that people are informed about the tagging and hashing and the legal implications surrounding it both on device and in the cloud.

I believe Apple has stated that they are able to hash files on the user device while the files are still encrypted (which Apple probably holds the keys to). In my limited understanding thus far, that says to me that the files can be tied back to the device in question even though they are encrypted.

I think Apple has given us a smoke and mirror view thus far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Expos of 1969

09872738

Cancelled
Feb 12, 2005
1,270
2,124
I believe Apple has stated that they are able to hash files on the user device while the files are still encrypted (which Apple probably holds the keys to).
That should be impossible. If its encrypted there‘s no way of even remotely find out its contents.

If Apple holds the keys its not at all private in the first place.
 

Apple_Robert

Contributor
Sep 21, 2012
34,584
50,262
In the middle of several books.
That should be impossible. If its encrypted there‘s no way of even remotely find out its contents.

If Apple holds the keys its not at all private in the first place.
I think you misunderstood me. I was speaking about establishing a chain of custody between the user of the device and the iCloud account the pictures were uploaded to. That can be used by LEO in a possible case. And if ordered, I don't see why Apple wouldn't unlock the files unless they are stating that they don't hold the keys. I don't see a way for the state or the feds to have a solid case without Apple being able to unlock the files. They can do so already with most of our account information.
 

Johnny907

macrumors 68020
Sep 20, 2014
2,005
3,635
It’s done on device but on the way to Apple’s servers.
Because it’s less scary than scanning 100% of the pics once they are already on the servers.
Where did you get that? The flow chart Apple released clearly shows the scanning is done on device as part of the normal indexing process. Any potential hits are then forwarded to Apple's servers for review. Whether icloud photos are turned off or not the indexing still occurs, and we are just supposed to trust Apple that everything going on inside this Black Box is as they say it is.

This was a stupid move on Tim's part, announcing this while Anti-trust talks are ongoing and electronic privacy is at the forefront of public awareness right behind the current COVID surge.
 

giggles

macrumors 65816
Dec 15, 2012
1,048
1,277
Where did you get that? The flow chart Apple released clearly shows the scanning is done on device as part of the normal indexing process.

“On the way to” is my quick and dirty way to say that these are pictures that will end up on Apple’s server anyway.

Out of frustration of reading and hearing people saying that apple is scanning local files.

Yes they will scan local files but for all intents and purposes they’re on their servers as well, because they will know about the security voucher count ONLY if you agree to upload those pics to iCloud Photo. It’s a Schroedinger cat situation. No actual privacy concerns difference compared to every other company doing these mass search scans server-side.
 

09872738

Cancelled
Feb 12, 2005
1,270
2,124
No actual privacy concerns difference compared to every other company doing these mass search scans server-side.
Could not disagree more. Actual scanning of all photos (and subsequently any files) are now just a flip of a swich away. Try that using server-side scanning.
I fully expect this „security feature“ activated for local files within a few years max.

Autoritarian regimes must rejoice
 

giggles

macrumors 65816
Dec 15, 2012
1,048
1,277
It was already one flip of a switch away.
Deep analysis of your photo library was already performed.
A crazy fast neural engine hardware was already in the phone.
The OS was already not open source.
 

giggles

macrumors 65816
Dec 15, 2012
1,048
1,277
Fact is, we either trust Apple or not, since the OS and the hw are not open source.

This system sets a precedent, true.

Apple’s privacy track record is also a precedent and I’m inclined to give them more good faith than I would give others. For now.

Sifting thru the drama, the actual facts are that Apple was the last company standing that would make very few CSAM searches compared to others. They were the last to fall, not the first like some people are implying. Now they are opening up to doing more CSAM scans (like the others have done for years) and they devised what they feel is a more privacy-minded way to do it. The rest is slippery slopes for the sake of slippery slopes. They could become true or not. Stay hungry, stay vigilant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire

Rigby

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2008
6,231
10,174
San Jose, CA
Where did you get that? The flow chart Apple released clearly shows the scanning is done on device as part of the normal indexing process. Any potential hits are then forwarded to Apple's servers for review. Whether icloud photos are turned off or not the indexing still occurs, and we are just supposed to trust Apple that everything going on inside this Black Box is as they say it is.
Logically the scanning does not require the files to be on iCloud. I think this is in part an attempt to "CYA". By framing the scanning as being a part of the upload process, they avoid searching and taking local data from the device outright, which would probably be illegal. Certainly pushing the boundaries here.
This was a stupid move on Tim's part, announcing this while Anti-trust talks are ongoing and electronic privacy is at the forefront of public awareness right behind the current COVID surge.
And right after the Pegasus story too. I'm not sure what to make of this. Normally Apple's PR department is a well-oiled machine. Did they drink their own Koolaid and misjudge how the public would react? Or did they anticipate the backlash, but for whatever reason thought it was necessary? At the very least this will be a major setback for their privacy marketing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 09872738

ajfahey

macrumors 6502a
Jun 28, 2001
686
904
Moorpark, CA
I don't follow this slippery slope thought process. He is essentially saying he doesn't trust Apple not to abuse this functionality. You could literally apply this to anything if you believe Apple has ill-intentions.

If we believe Apple has some master plan to abuse this then this opens open every part of their ecosystem to the same "it could be abused if they want to" statement.
They probably don’t have a master plan to abuse surveillance power. But that’s the defining feature of a slippery slope. Its a process by which you slip into disastrous unintended consequences by following a path what seems that see,s to be altruistic or benevolent.
 

09872738

Cancelled
Feb 12, 2005
1,270
2,124
And right after the Pegasus story too. I'm not sure what to make of this. Normally Apple's PR department is a well-oiled machine. Did they drink their own Koolaid and misjudge how the public would react? Or did they anticipate the backlash, but for whatever reason thought it was necessary? At the very least this will be a major setback for their privacy marketing.
Will be interesting to see how they try to spin this. They can neither continue nor backtrack without losing face and there will have to be a whole lot of explanation to do
 

turbineseaplane

macrumors P6
Mar 19, 2008
15,248
32,855
How people use their phone and for what purposes is any business of Apples how exactly? This is a key question.

Does Toyota monitor my use of my car in case I may use it as a getwaway car in a bank robbery? Does Jameson monitor where I take my whiskey bottle to ensure I don't let an underage person have a drink?

Such a great point

People are somehow missing how absolutely dystopian and out of place and just flat **wrong** anything like this is.

Apple has no business at all drilling down into users data on their own devices in this way.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.