4 ms·

I don't understand how this is supposed to do anything except generate false positives. If someone takes a new picture of a child being abused, that won't be o

I don't understand how this is supposed to do anything except generate false positives. If someone takes a new picture of a child being abused, that won't be on the database so won't get flagged. Are they expecting child-abusers to take photos of existing photos of children being abused? Or are they hoping to catch abusers sending each other known photos of child abuse unencrypted? Because that's: a: stupid (the even-remotely-smart abusers will encrypt their abuse) and b: rife for mis-use (I, using a non-Apple device, send your Apple device a photo of abuse. You're now flagged as an abuser and your life shuts down) As others have said, I don't think this has anything to do with child abuse, because it plain doesn't work as a method of preventing child abuse. It totally works for flagging "politically unacceptable" images, though. Maybe the CCP got fed up of all those memes?

donkeyd 5y ago
I'm surprised how shocked people are about this new thing from Apple. Both Google and Microsoft are already doing this stuff and have been since 2014[0][1]. How come Apple is getting such a huge amount of hate for this, but nobody even seems aware of the others already having implemented such technologies. I also hope nobody here ever gets mad about the rampant child pornography going around on platforms like Kik, because that would be incredibly hypocritical. 0: https://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-your-gmail-for-child-porn https://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-y... 1: https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/08/10/microsoft-scans-email-for-child-porn-images-leads-to-arrest%E2%80%8F/ https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/08/10/microsoft-scans-...
- hu3 5y ago
  It has to do with the way Apple advertises being a herald of privacy. Also your links say that Google and Microsoft scan e-mails on the cloud. Not phone storage as in Apple's case.
  - donkeyd 5y ago
    > Also your links say that Google and Microsoft scan e-mails on the cloud. Not phone storage as in Apple's case. Another confirmation that Google and MS have access to the data you store in the cloud and Apple does not. It's very unfortunate that scanning this locally is viewed as a negative in stead of a positive.
    - hu3 5y ago
      What confirmation? Apple already has access to your cloud data: FBI 'persuaded Apple to halt iCloud encryption' - https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51207744 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51207744
- dilap 5y ago
  Yeah, you expect it from Google and MS; Apple was the one tech giant that promised to value your privacy, so now that they've turned on that, there are no mainstream options left. Hence the strong dismay. (Honestly Apple probably doesn't really have an option -- the govt wants this, and I'm sure they can exert all kinds of leverage to get it if Apple doesn't comply.)
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  Unless Apple is starting to view YOUR phone as THEIR property - this is an invasion. Android does not scan your phone. Google scans content uploaded to ITS machines - because content hosted on ITS machines is a liability.
  - Spivak 5y ago
    Right and how you reduce that liability is to do the scanning client-side and reject the upload/send. Google does this with Drive uploads and WhatsApp does it on message sends. You can't be in hot water for hosting/distributing CSAM if it never gets on your servers/network in the first place.
nmeofthestate 5y ago
It's a measure to attack the distribution and consumption of child porn, which is a driver for its production. It can also help provide evidence in unearthing child porn rings. Seems obvious.
- salawat 5y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocal... There's way more to it than appears at first blush. This is much more than a kiddie porn thing, it's a fundamental shift in the Overton window.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
_fat_santa 5y ago
I was talking with my roommate about this yesterday. Similarly to how in the article there was a cat picture that the NN said was guac, I wonder if we will start to see the rise of "booby trapped images" where you might be downloading a wallpaper but unknown to you, that image contains CSAM hashes.
- treis 5y ago
  Hash collisions are theoretically impossible. It's a completely different issue than a NN misclassifying an image. It reflects poorly on the author that they made this argument.
  - jpablo 5y ago
    I'm sorry, but this is 100% incorrect. In fact the opposite is true. Hash collisions are 100% impossible to avoid. You are mapping an infinite set (the set of all possible images) to a finite set (a fixed length number). Cryptographic hashes are designed so that collisions are hard to construct at will. But this is not a cryptographic hash at all and I wouldn't be surprised that constructing an image that matches a given hash is easy.
    - treis 5y ago
      >I'm sorry, but this is 100% incorrect. In fact the opposite is true. >Hash collisions are 100% impossible to avoid. You are mapping an infinite set (the set of all possible images) to a finite set (a fixed length number). If you want to be needlessly pedantic I guess. But for 99.999999% of usage hash collisions don't exist in practice. >Cryptographic hashes are designed so that collisions are hard to construct at will. But this is not a cryptographic hash at all and I wouldn't be surprised that constructing an image that matches a given hash is easy. You got a cite to back this up? Because they claim otherwise.
      - gnulinux 5y ago
        > If you want to be needlessly pedantic I guess. But for 99.999999% of usage hash collisions don't exist in practice. Oh right, that very soothing. The very device I spent $1000 on has 0.0001% of ruining my life by causing a no-knock raid due to a false positive. They should put this stuff on their ads, makes me wanna buy more Apple products. I'd much rather sell all my current Apple devices and permanently switch to linux than do this.
bishoprook2 5y ago
>If someone takes a new picture of a child being abused, that won't be on the database so won't get flagged. Hah. That's an interesting point. If anything you are encouraging new child porn.

donkeyd 5y ago

I'm surprised how shocked people are about this new thing from Apple. Both Google and Microsoft are already doing this stuff and have been since 2014[0][1]. How come Apple is getting such a huge amount of hate for this, but nobody even seems aware of the others already having implemented such technologies. I also hope nobody here ever gets mad about the rampant child pornography going around on platforms like Kik, because that would be incredibly hypocritical. 0: https://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-your-gmail-for-child-porn https://www.theverge.com/2014/8/5/5970141/how-google-scans-y... 1: https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/08/10/microsoft-scans-email-for-child-porn-images-leads-to-arrest%E2%80%8F/ https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/08/10/microsoft-scans-...

hu3 5y ago
It has to do with the way Apple advertises being a herald of privacy. Also your links say that Google and Microsoft scan e-mails on the cloud. Not phone storage as in Apple's case.
- donkeyd 5y ago
  > Also your links say that Google and Microsoft scan e-mails on the cloud. Not phone storage as in Apple's case. Another confirmation that Google and MS have access to the data you store in the cloud and Apple does not. It's very unfortunate that scanning this locally is viewed as a negative in stead of a positive.
  - hu3 5y ago
    What confirmation? Apple already has access to your cloud data: FBI 'persuaded Apple to halt iCloud encryption' - https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51207744 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51207744
dilap 5y ago
Yeah, you expect it from Google and MS; Apple was the one tech giant that promised to value your privacy, so now that they've turned on that, there are no mainstream options left. Hence the strong dismay. (Honestly Apple probably doesn't really have an option -- the govt wants this, and I'm sure they can exert all kinds of leverage to get it if Apple doesn't comply.)
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
Unless Apple is starting to view YOUR phone as THEIR property - this is an invasion. Android does not scan your phone. Google scans content uploaded to ITS machines - because content hosted on ITS machines is a liability.
- Spivak 5y ago
  Right and how you reduce that liability is to do the scanning client-side and reject the upload/send. Google does this with Drive uploads and WhatsApp does it on message sends. You can't be in hot water for hosting/distributing CSAM if it never gets on your servers/network in the first place.

nmeofthestate 5y ago

It's a measure to attack the distribution and consumption of child porn, which is a driver for its production. It can also help provide evidence in unearthing child porn rings. Seems obvious.

salawat 5y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocal... There's way more to it than appears at first blush. This is much more than a kiddie porn thing, it's a fundamental shift in the Overton window.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

_fat_santa 5y ago

I was talking with my roommate about this yesterday. Similarly to how in the article there was a cat picture that the NN said was guac, I wonder if we will start to see the rise of "booby trapped images" where you might be downloading a wallpaper but unknown to you, that image contains CSAM hashes.

treis 5y ago
Hash collisions are theoretically impossible. It's a completely different issue than a NN misclassifying an image. It reflects poorly on the author that they made this argument.
- jpablo 5y ago
  I'm sorry, but this is 100% incorrect. In fact the opposite is true. Hash collisions are 100% impossible to avoid. You are mapping an infinite set (the set of all possible images) to a finite set (a fixed length number). Cryptographic hashes are designed so that collisions are hard to construct at will. But this is not a cryptographic hash at all and I wouldn't be surprised that constructing an image that matches a given hash is easy.
  - treis 5y ago
    >I'm sorry, but this is 100% incorrect. In fact the opposite is true. >Hash collisions are 100% impossible to avoid. You are mapping an infinite set (the set of all possible images) to a finite set (a fixed length number). If you want to be needlessly pedantic I guess. But for 99.999999% of usage hash collisions don't exist in practice. >Cryptographic hashes are designed so that collisions are hard to construct at will. But this is not a cryptographic hash at all and I wouldn't be surprised that constructing an image that matches a given hash is easy. You got a cite to back this up? Because they claim otherwise.
    - gnulinux 5y ago
      > If you want to be needlessly pedantic I guess. But for 99.999999% of usage hash collisions don't exist in practice. Oh right, that very soothing. The very device I spent $1000 on has 0.0001% of ruining my life by causing a no-knock raid due to a false positive. They should put this stuff on their ads, makes me wanna buy more Apple products. I'd much rather sell all my current Apple devices and permanently switch to linux than do this.

bishoprook2 5y ago

>If someone takes a new picture of a child being abused, that won't be on the database so won't get flagged. Hah. That's an interesting point. If anything you are encouraging new child porn.