6 ms·

By the way they already scan photos that aren’t uploaded to iCloud. I’ve never used iCloud and I can go on the photos app and search for food for example

by jkcxn 5y ago

ninkendo 5y ago
Right, the difference is that now, you can be reported to the authorities for a photo that the CSAM algorithm mistook for child pornography, whereas before the image classifying was purely for your own use.
- zepto 5y ago
  This is simply a complete falsehood, because photos that are not uploaded are not scanned for CSAM. Photos for your own use that you do not upload to Apple’s cloud are completely unaffected.
zepto 5y ago
Exactly. They already analysed photos on your phone for search. They don’t in fact do CSAM detection on the photos on your phone. But why are people only objecting now when they were already doing on-device analysis? CSAM detection is a complete red herring. It is less of a general purpose scanning mechanism than the search function that was already there.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  They're doing on device analysis, but there isn't any process by which an image of a hotdog will be sent to someone else without my knowledge.
  - zepto 5y ago
    Right, but neither is the CSAM code being used to detect anything but CSAM. If a bit can be flipped to make the CSAM detector go evil, surely it can be flipped to make photo search go evil, or spotlight start reporting files that match keywords for that matter. There is nothing special about this CSAM detector except that it’s narrower and harder to repurpose than most of the rest of the system.
    - pritambaral 5y ago
      > ... to make photo search go evil, or spotlight start reporting files that match keywords for that matter. As your immediate parent has already said: there isn't any process by which an image of a hotdog will be sent to someone else without my knowledge. Neither "photo search" nor "spotlight" report anything to third parties currently.
      - zepto 5y ago
        No, but a ‘bit flip’ could make them do so just as easily as a ‘bit flip’ could make the CSAM detector do something nefarious.
        pritambaral 5y ago
        How are you still not getting this?: "search" and "spotlight" do not have the code to report anything to anyone.
        zepto 5y ago
        How are you still not getting it? The code to ‘report’ something is barely more than a one liner http request. It could be added at any time. On the other hand, making the CSAM code scan your text documents would be pointlessly difficult given that the other mechanisms exist.
        pritambaral 5y ago
        > It could be added at any time. It has already been added. That's the point here. The phone already has the code to report its own owner. People are rightfully pissed about that. Also, adding a one-liner of code is a lot more than a bit-flip. That's the addition of a feature, which is a major business decision. Code that already exists is a lot closer to "misfiring" than code that simply does not. Flipping a policy config, OTOH, could be "explained" away a lot easier. In fact, Big Tech does it all the time! (Remember Facebook's "Oh. Sorry. It was a bug."?) ---- Please stop this poor attempt at moving the goalposts by saying, "But, similar code could be added at any time in the future! Why're you guys complaining now?!" It's also not about where the scanning is happening, or whether that's new or old. The old scanning is not a problem, precisely because it does no reporting. The new scanning IS a problem, precisely because it does the reporting. The former is not a problem on its own. The latter is. That's the point you keep missing.

By the way they already scan photos that aren’t uploaded to iCloud. I’ve never used iCloud and I can go on the photos app and search for food for example

by jkcxn 5y ago

By the way they already scan photos that aren’t uploaded to iCloud. I’ve never used iCloud and I can go on the photos app and search for food for example

ninkendo 5y ago

Right, the difference is that now, you can be reported to the authorities for a photo that the CSAM algorithm mistook for child pornography, whereas before the image classifying was purely for your own use.

zepto 5y ago
This is simply a complete falsehood, because photos that are not uploaded are not scanned for CSAM. Photos for your own use that you do not upload to Apple’s cloud are completely unaffected.

zepto 5y ago

Exactly. They already analysed photos on your phone for search. They don’t in fact do CSAM detection on the photos on your phone. But why are people only objecting now when they were already doing on-device analysis? CSAM detection is a complete red herring. It is less of a general purpose scanning mechanism than the search function that was already there.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago
They're doing on device analysis, but there isn't any process by which an image of a hotdog will be sent to someone else without my knowledge.
- zepto 5y ago
  Right, but neither is the CSAM code being used to detect anything but CSAM. If a bit can be flipped to make the CSAM detector go evil, surely it can be flipped to make photo search go evil, or spotlight start reporting files that match keywords for that matter. There is nothing special about this CSAM detector except that it’s narrower and harder to repurpose than most of the rest of the system.
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    > ... to make photo search go evil, or spotlight start reporting files that match keywords for that matter. As your immediate parent has already said: there isn't any process by which an image of a hotdog will be sent to someone else without my knowledge. Neither "photo search" nor "spotlight" report anything to third parties currently.
    - zepto 5y ago
      No, but a ‘bit flip’ could make them do so just as easily as a ‘bit flip’ could make the CSAM detector do something nefarious.
      - pritambaral 5y ago
        How are you still not getting this?: "search" and "spotlight" do not have the code to report anything to anyone.
        zepto 5y ago
        How are you still not getting it? The code to ‘report’ something is barely more than a one liner http request. It could be added at any time. On the other hand, making the CSAM code scan your text documents would be pointlessly difficult given that the other mechanisms exist.
        pritambaral 5y ago
        > It could be added at any time. It has already been added. That's the point here. The phone already has the code to report its own owner. People are rightfully pissed about that. Also, adding a one-liner of code is a lot more than a bit-flip. That's the addition of a feature, which is a major business decision. Code that already exists is a lot closer to "misfiring" than code that simply does not. Flipping a policy config, OTOH, could be "explained" away a lot easier. In fact, Big Tech does it all the time! (Remember Facebook's "Oh. Sorry. It was a bug."?) ---- Please stop this poor attempt at moving the goalposts by saying, "But, similar code could be added at any time in the future! Why're you guys complaining now?!" It's also not about where the scanning is happening, or whether that's new or old. The old scanning is not a problem, precisely because it does no reporting. The new scanning IS a problem, precisely because it does the reporting. The former is not a problem on its own. The latter is. That's the point you keep missing.