4 ms·

I think they are probably just going to match the hashes to known hashes of "bad" images.

syshum 5y ago
Plain file hashing for this kind of thing has not been used for years (or even decades), Microsoft came out with Photo DNA along time ago, and I am sure now days they have something ML powered to do it. I am not sure the accuracy of these systems but even if they are pretty accurate there is something off putting about this trend. This very much feels like a Guilty until proven innocent type of program... "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"... Neither of those normally work out really well.
- lstamour 5y ago
  > Guilty until proven innocent type of program But this software doesn’t make arrests? A comparison would be police asking for what cellphones were in an area. There should be a lot of due process that happens before anything comes of this. I imagine police won’t look into one photo, they would want to match more than one. I agree though, the scary part might be how to clear your name after an overreaction occurs, similar to the effect swatting has on innocents or other kinds of false accusations. But those would happen even without such a system - we’ve heard about such stories before. “Man held for child porn charges, but it turned out they were innocent,” - it doesn’t take this kind of system to have police look over your phone for evidence and find a different crime than expected. That all said… child porn is really, really terrible and I’m actually in favour of this. As a society, we can decide on what’s acceptable. As long as there’s due process and a presumption of innocence, I’m all in favour of making it harder for criminals to get away with crimes. I do agree though, all these systems might make it harder to catch perpetrators if it pushes them offline. But what other options do we have to stop these sort of crimes when the kids involved can’t or won’t speak up? I suppose the fundamental problem is that having more evidence doesn’t necessarily lead to justice if it paints a false picture.
  - shotta 5y ago
    I see it as an unwarranted search, which makes me feel like the state views me as inherently guilty until innocence is proven by sifting through my photos.
    - mlac 5y ago
      It’s not the state, it’s Apple. And they are making the decision that they do not want to put out a product that makes it easy for CP to be shared or viewed. As a huge player in the market this is great. This also limits the possible avenues for future exposure - if one has less ways to distribute or get CP or the overall amount of it is reduced, they may never get into it in the first place and the market for it will shrink. Thereby reducing the amount produced over time.
      - analyte123 5y ago
        According to the article, Apple is responding to government and law enforcement pressure to implement the scanning. The state is just laundering its desires through private corporations; there must be a word for this type of system.
      - marderfarker2 5y ago
        Today they say it’s for CP, tomorrow they will say it’s for pirated content, or anything deemed illegal by the government.
  - __blockcipher__ 5y ago
    Apple will be scanning the photos on your phone and cross-referencing them against photoDNA for a government database. You don't see how that's not a huge potential for abuse right there? The government decides the images. And you best believe they're not going to release the images publicly to verify what's in the db, for [many] obvious reasons. This is a horrible idea, a massive regression in Apple (and therefore the broader industry's) stance on security/privacy, and the fact that you are dutifully swallowing the "child porn" justification is so incredibly concerning to me.
- Spooky23 5y ago
  They work out very well. Any significant storage provider has been using them for years.

Plain file hashing for this kind of thing has not been used for years (or even decades), Microsoft came out with Photo DNA along time ago, and I am sure now days they have something ML powered to do it. I am not sure the accuracy of these systems but even if they are pretty accurate there is something off putting about this trend. This very much feels like a Guilty until proven innocent type of program... "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"... Neither of those normally work out really well.

lstamour 5y ago
> Guilty until proven innocent type of program But this software doesn’t make arrests? A comparison would be police asking for what cellphones were in an area. There should be a lot of due process that happens before anything comes of this. I imagine police won’t look into one photo, they would want to match more than one. I agree though, the scary part might be how to clear your name after an overreaction occurs, similar to the effect swatting has on innocents or other kinds of false accusations. But those would happen even without such a system - we’ve heard about such stories before. “Man held for child porn charges, but it turned out they were innocent,” - it doesn’t take this kind of system to have police look over your phone for evidence and find a different crime than expected. That all said… child porn is really, really terrible and I’m actually in favour of this. As a society, we can decide on what’s acceptable. As long as there’s due process and a presumption of innocence, I’m all in favour of making it harder for criminals to get away with crimes. I do agree though, all these systems might make it harder to catch perpetrators if it pushes them offline. But what other options do we have to stop these sort of crimes when the kids involved can’t or won’t speak up? I suppose the fundamental problem is that having more evidence doesn’t necessarily lead to justice if it paints a false picture.
- shotta 5y ago
  I see it as an unwarranted search, which makes me feel like the state views me as inherently guilty until innocence is proven by sifting through my photos.
  - mlac 5y ago
    It’s not the state, it’s Apple. And they are making the decision that they do not want to put out a product that makes it easy for CP to be shared or viewed. As a huge player in the market this is great. This also limits the possible avenues for future exposure - if one has less ways to distribute or get CP or the overall amount of it is reduced, they may never get into it in the first place and the market for it will shrink. Thereby reducing the amount produced over time.
    - analyte123 5y ago
      According to the article, Apple is responding to government and law enforcement pressure to implement the scanning. The state is just laundering its desires through private corporations; there must be a word for this type of system.
    - marderfarker2 5y ago
      Today they say it’s for CP, tomorrow they will say it’s for pirated content, or anything deemed illegal by the government.
- __blockcipher__ 5y ago
  Apple will be scanning the photos on your phone and cross-referencing them against photoDNA for a government database. You don't see how that's not a huge potential for abuse right there? The government decides the images. And you best believe they're not going to release the images publicly to verify what's in the db, for [many] obvious reasons. This is a horrible idea, a massive regression in Apple (and therefore the broader industry's) stance on security/privacy, and the fact that you are dutifully swallowing the "child porn" justification is so incredibly concerning to me.
Spooky23 5y ago
They work out very well. Any significant storage provider has been using them for years.