4 ms·

“Let us be clear, this technology is limited to detecting CSAM [child sexual abuse material] stored in iCloud and we will not accede to any government’s request

“Let us be clear, this technology is limited to detecting CSAM [child sexual abuse material] stored in iCloud and we will not accede to any government’s request to expand it,” Which could be a carefully worded truth that says absolutely nothing about government demands. What is Apple going to do when they get a national security letter demanding that they never speak of it and demanding that they scan devices for other things?

cageface 5y ago
In many jurisdictions they can be forced to accede to government requests and they have already done so many times to the detriment of their users' rights.
- treesknees 5y ago
  Do you have any examples of this happening in the United States where CSAM scanning is being deployed? It is my understanding that Apple has generally declined to implement requests like backdoored firmware for the FBI.
  - dolni 5y ago
    After Snowden blew the lid off the NSA's mass surveillance program, why are we here asking questions about whether some particular type of surveillance has or hasn't happened in the USA? The USA is absolutely capable of expanding this far beyond what it should be.
gentleman11 5y ago
> It’s worth noting that despite Apple’s assurances, the company has made concessions to governments in the past in order to continue operating in their countries. It sells iPhones without FaceTime in countries that don’t allow encrypted phone calls, and in China it’s removed thousands of apps from its App Store, as well as moved to store user data on the servers of a state-run telecom. It’s pretty clear what will happen
karmakaze 5y ago
No, the 'technology' knows nothing of the nature of what it processes. It can be adapted for any purpose. A slippery slope problem I see with privacy starting with a clear-cut, 'yes we should' use case, is then we go on to another clear-cut case, maybe terrorism, whatever the second one is, then it's a pattern. I don't trust the process, people that administer, and other people that influence the process.

cageface 5y ago

In many jurisdictions they can be forced to accede to government requests and they have already done so many times to the detriment of their users' rights.

treesknees 5y ago
Do you have any examples of this happening in the United States where CSAM scanning is being deployed? It is my understanding that Apple has generally declined to implement requests like backdoored firmware for the FBI.
- dolni 5y ago
  After Snowden blew the lid off the NSA's mass surveillance program, why are we here asking questions about whether some particular type of surveillance has or hasn't happened in the USA? The USA is absolutely capable of expanding this far beyond what it should be.

gentleman11 5y ago

> It’s worth noting that despite Apple’s assurances, the company has made concessions to governments in the past in order to continue operating in their countries. It sells iPhones without FaceTime in countries that don’t allow encrypted phone calls, and in China it’s removed thousands of apps from its App Store, as well as moved to store user data on the servers of a state-run telecom. It’s pretty clear what will happen

karmakaze 5y ago

No, the 'technology' knows nothing of the nature of what it processes. It can be adapted for any purpose. A slippery slope problem I see with privacy starting with a clear-cut, 'yes we should' use case, is then we go on to another clear-cut case, maybe terrorism, whatever the second one is, then it's a pattern. I don't trust the process, people that administer, and other people that influence the process.