4 ms·

It is not the role of infrastructure providers to reach into private, on device content. That is like the USPS opening every letter and scanning what is inside

by dannyw 5y ago

It is not the role of infrastructure providers to reach into private, on device content. That is like the USPS opening every letter and scanning what is inside. Even if it's done with machine learning, that is absolutely not okay, no matter what it is for.

game_the0ry 5y ago
Agreed, but not like we have a choice with that matter.
- voakbasda 5y ago
  You have a choice about whether to keep or discard your iPhone.
rcruzeiro 5y ago
Though we were okay with Gmail doing the same because "hey, it's free!". But I understand your concern here. All our lives are now digitalised and maybe stored forever somewhere and anything you do, even if completely benign, could be considered a crime in some country or even in your own country in a few years from now.
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  Your gmail messages live on Google's servers. It's not ok for them to scan everything, but it's completely different from Apple scanning your phone's content.
  - pgoggijr 5y ago
    The hashes are computed from images that live in iCloud - how is this different?
    - rcruzeiro 5y ago
      Suppose Apple flags some image in iCloud using a hash that was probably sent from the device. Do they currently have the capability to decrypt the image to check if the content is actually illegal before reporting it to the authorities without needing access to the physical device? (Not trying to make a counter-argument to your comment. I genuinely don't get this part).
      - pgoggijr 5y ago
        Hmm not sure what you mean. The hashes are shipped with iOS, and then (if parental controls are enabled) compared with the hashes computed against the unencrypted data on-device, and displays a warning to the user and their parents. I'm not sure how the image is displayed on the parents' device - it could be sent from the child's device, or the image used to compute the hash that the child's image matched could be displayed.
- gerash 5y ago
  Are you claiming GMail looks through the emails to match them with crime keywords and reports you to the authorities? citation needed
  - rcruzeiro 5y ago
    I'm claiming they use the content of your messages to profile you and better target their ads until they stopped this practice in 2017 in favour of reading your email "for better product personalisation".
    - gerash 5y ago
      gmail (and any other web based email) needs to "read" the email content to provide a search function. If the same program also uses the content to pick some ads from the inventory then I'm personally ok with that. That is different from searching them for illegal material based on what illegal implies at a given time and location.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  nope. i’m not okay with Gmail doing that. in fact I’ve completed removed all google products from my life. i don’t need someone to constantly spy on me.
Spivak 5y ago
But the USPS does scan every letter (and package for that matter) for things like weapons and anthrax. Don't think the US is taking a hard-line stance here. If it were possible to non-destructively scan mail for CP they absolutely would.
- techdragon 5y ago
  The scanning for those things doesn’t allow them to scan the written or printed content of letters sent through the post. If i recall correctly isn’t there a legal distinction involved in mail privacy, I recall an explanation involving the difference between postcards and letters with respect to lawful interception…
  - judge2020 5y ago
    Shine a bright light through the envelope, you Should be able to make out some letters. Maybe make a neural network for reading these letters and putting them together into sentences.
    - buildbot 5y ago
      UPS and Fedex can do this as private companies, my understanding is the USPS actually can't due to the 4th Amendment: "The Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of U.S. mail as if it had been kept by the sender in his home. Ex parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727, 732-733, 735 (1878); U.S. v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249, 252-52 (1970). It cannot be searched without a search warrant based on probable cause."

by dannyw 5y ago

game_the0ry 5y ago

Agreed, but not like we have a choice with that matter.

voakbasda 5y ago
You have a choice about whether to keep or discard your iPhone.

rcruzeiro 5y ago

Though we were okay with Gmail doing the same because "hey, it's free!". But I understand your concern here. All our lives are now digitalised and maybe stored forever somewhere and anything you do, even if completely benign, could be considered a crime in some country or even in your own country in a few years from now.

marcosdumay 5y ago
Your gmail messages live on Google's servers. It's not ok for them to scan everything, but it's completely different from Apple scanning your phone's content.
- pgoggijr 5y ago
  The hashes are computed from images that live in iCloud - how is this different?
  - rcruzeiro 5y ago
    Suppose Apple flags some image in iCloud using a hash that was probably sent from the device. Do they currently have the capability to decrypt the image to check if the content is actually illegal before reporting it to the authorities without needing access to the physical device? (Not trying to make a counter-argument to your comment. I genuinely don't get this part).
    - pgoggijr 5y ago
      Hmm not sure what you mean. The hashes are shipped with iOS, and then (if parental controls are enabled) compared with the hashes computed against the unencrypted data on-device, and displays a warning to the user and their parents. I'm not sure how the image is displayed on the parents' device - it could be sent from the child's device, or the image used to compute the hash that the child's image matched could be displayed.
gerash 5y ago
Are you claiming GMail looks through the emails to match them with crime keywords and reports you to the authorities? citation needed
- rcruzeiro 5y ago
  I'm claiming they use the content of your messages to profile you and better target their ads until they stopped this practice in 2017 in favour of reading your email "for better product personalisation".
  - gerash 5y ago
    gmail (and any other web based email) needs to "read" the email content to provide a search function. If the same program also uses the content to pick some ads from the inventory then I'm personally ok with that. That is different from searching them for illegal material based on what illegal implies at a given time and location.
rantwasp 5y ago
nope. i’m not okay with Gmail doing that. in fact I’ve completed removed all google products from my life. i don’t need someone to constantly spy on me.

Spivak 5y ago

But the USPS does scan every letter (and package for that matter) for things like weapons and anthrax. Don't think the US is taking a hard-line stance here. If it were possible to non-destructively scan mail for CP they absolutely would.

techdragon 5y ago
The scanning for those things doesn’t allow them to scan the written or printed content of letters sent through the post. If i recall correctly isn’t there a legal distinction involved in mail privacy, I recall an explanation involving the difference between postcards and letters with respect to lawful interception…
- judge2020 5y ago
  Shine a bright light through the envelope, you Should be able to make out some letters. Maybe make a neural network for reading these letters and putting them together into sentences.
  - buildbot 5y ago
    UPS and Fedex can do this as private companies, my understanding is the USPS actually can't due to the 4th Amendment: "The Fourth Amendment protects the privacy of U.S. mail as if it had been kept by the sender in his home. Ex parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727, 732-733, 735 (1878); U.S. v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249, 252-52 (1970). It cannot be searched without a search warrant based on probable cause."