23 ms·
I think the problem Apple ran into was that there was no confusion at all. Apple announced they were going to scan users' devices after years of marketing thems
by tharne 5y ago
I think the problem Apple ran into was that there was no confusion at all. Apple announced they were going to scan users' devices after years of marketing themselves as a "privacy-focused" company. Shockingly, customers were pretty mad about the whole thing.
- zepto 5y agoThey aren’t scanning users devices. If you think this, there is definitely confusion in the information getting out.
- david_shaw 5y ago> They aren’t scanning users devices. They are scanning images on iPhones and iPads prior to uploading those images to iCloud. If you're not uploading images to iCloud, your photos won't be scanned -- but if you are using iCloud, Apple will absolutely check images on your device. From Apple's Child Safety page: > Apple’s method of detecting known CSAM is designed with user privacy in mind. Instead of scanning images in the cloud, the system performs on-device matching using a database of known CSAM image hashes provided by NCMEC and other child safety organizations. Apple further transforms this database into an unreadable set of hashes that is securely stored on users’ devices. > Before an image is stored in iCloud Photos, an on-device matching process is performed for that image against the known CSAM hashes. This matching process is powered by a cryptographic technology called private set intersection, which determines if there is a match without revealing the result. The device creates a cryptographic safety voucher that encodes the match result along with additional encrypted data about the image. This voucher is uploaded to iCloud Photos along with the image. Source: https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/
- zepto 5y ago> Apple will absolutely check images on your device. Yes, they will check the images you have chosen to upload. No ‘scanning is involved’. Claiming this is ‘scanning users devices’ is just dishonest - it’s obvious that it creates a false dichotomy impression of what they are actually doing. Don’t do that.
- swiley 5y agoWhat about when your iCloud account is full (the default storage size is useless if you enable any kind of backup) so the photos never get uploaded?
- zepto 5y agoRight.
- zekrioca 5y agoCheck == Scanning, because to create the output, the hash function needs to “scan” the whole blob.
- zepto 5y agoEven if we accept that. It is a lie to say the device is being scanned. It is definitely not. Only the photos the user chooses to upload are checked. That is not the device.
- zekrioca 5y agoIt is part of the device, and this specific part is being scanned. Can I physically remove this “checking” part and end up with a working iDevice D that resembles D = {{Device \ {/iCloud/Photo Library}}? Frame it the way you want. It is the device.
- zepto 5y agoThe checking is being done on the device. Nobody disputes that. Indeed it is being marketed by Apple as a feature. Yes, this feature is part of the device. If you say Apple is scanning the device, you are lying. They are not scanning the device. They are scanning photos chosen for upload.
- zekrioca 5y ago
- RussianCow 5y agoYou're splitting hairs unnecessarily. Apple is scanning users' photos on their devices. To say that they are not "scanning devices" because they are (currently) only targeting photos and not every single other part of the phone is unhelpful at best, and detracts from the point that this is a massive violation of their users' privacy. The exact wording here really doesn't matter as much as you think it does.
- zepto 5y agoHow does it ‘detract from the point’ to not speak falsely? If you intentionally make someone think that anything other than the photos they are uploading are being scanned, then you are deceiving them. Deceiving people to make your point doesn’t help anything. It just makes you a liar and the other person misinformed. If this is a massive privacy violation in itself, then you shouldn’t need to exaggerate it.
- mortenjorck 5y agoThe "confusion" is splitting hairs. Federighi is trying to draw an artificial distinction between client-side scanning and in-transit scanning where the code performing that in-transit scanning merely happens to be running... on the client.
- willcipriano 5y agoUser story for this feature: "As a user if the phone I spent $1200 on is going to spy on me, I want it to also use my electricity."
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- rendaw 5y agoWhile still being controlled remotely.
- notJim 5y agoI was definitely confused, for the record. I had the impression that Apple would scan all photos on device, but that is not true. I was also confused because several changes were announced at once, and the conversations sometimes blended them.
- acchow 5y agoIt’s my understanding that the your iPhone would be checking ALL your photos on your device. Where did you get to understand otherwise?
- jb1991 5y agoI thought it was only an iCloud scan, which is perhaps just as bad, but not a scan of anything that only exists on the iPhone itself.
- burlesona 5y agoThat’s what Federighi says in this interview. It’s only scanning photos that are about to be uploaded to iCloud. Otherwise photos aren’t scanned. Disable iCloud and there’s no scanning. Still, I think Apple misjudged the whole cloud vs. device thing in this case. They’ve historically preached a lot about how everything should happen on the users device, not the cloud. I think that got myopic for them, and led them to this decision. But in this case I think users would be much happier if Apple had just said “under pressure from law enforcement we are now scanning photos when they arrive at the iCloud data centers. If you don’t want scanning don’t use iCloud.” Because it’s not so much the scanning of uploaded photos that has people upset, it’s the fact that the scanning and phoning home is baked into the device itself.
- Johnny555 5y agoDisable iCloud and there’s no scanning. Many people (like myself) are worried about the slippery slope where this is turned on for all photos, since why not? Not all abusers will upload their CSAM content to the cloud, why wouldn't Apple flip a flag in the future to scan everything, including photos and downloaded content? If they are serious about fighting CSAM and have this great privacy preserving platform, I don't see why they wouldn't do this?
- gentleman11 5y agoThey are gas lighting people who are upset about what is really happening, and what will happen in 5-10 years, and portraying them as confused and ignorant instead. It’s the standard “you’re holding it wrong” Apple play
- politelemon 5y agoFive years ago it was: "you’re holding it wrong" Five years from now it'll be: "you're wrong" HN will as usual agree and take pride in being wrong.
- Bud 5y agoActually, HN is, as usual, doing a great job of evaluating and discussing this issue, in real time.
- krapp 5y agoJudging from the threads so far, HN believes Apple is scanning everything using a naive perceptual hash implementation it probably got off of Stack Overflow, with no oversight or sanity checks, and that even a loose match (which will be trivial) means SWAT teams automatically being sent to bust down your front door like the FBI meme, and that it's all just a pretext for CCP style authoritarian surveillance anyway, and we'll all be in dissident reeducation camps by the end of the year. I suppose it's great if you're looking for entertainment value. For rational, informed discussion of the technology and its political and social ramifications, not so much. It's just the same refrain of "we never bother to actually RTFA but we imagine a boot stomping on a human face forever."
- echelon 5y agoI've tagged HN users using a small browser plugin I wrote. It's amusing to see all the Apple users jump to the defense of Apple despite their continued shitty behavior. It's also great to see the handful that have changed their minds.
- hypothesis 5y agoThere was no confusion at all. There is no way Apple released their initial PR piece without thinking it through and deliberately fusing all those new features together as one big unassailable initiative. It was typical my way or the highway. Which also make it funny now that they attempt to distinguish between them and run into same hole that they dug for other people. [1] https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/
- Bud 5y agoThis is inaccurate by definition, of course. Obviously. "My way or the highway" implies there is no alternative. But in this case, of course, if you're an adult, the Messages part of this doesn't apply to you at all, and the photos part can be completely avoided by not using iCloud Photos.
- christkv 5y agoFor now
- gary17the 5y agoNo offense, but have you even owned an iPhone/iPad for a considerable length of time? The darn things include a maze of settings that are inter-dependent and unexpectedly lose/alter their values; perhaps not on regular basis, but always once in a while (e.g., with a new iOS version). If file scanning and reporting capability is present, code-wise, on your device, you can consider it active - sooner or later.
- shapefrog 5y agoNo offense, but are you mentally retarded? Can you not figure out how to click a slider? My 95 year old grandmother, who was schooled to the age of 14, has figured it out.
- flyinglizard 5y agoSorry for commenting on a comment, but it was so hauntingly offensive that it wrapped around to the poetic. It reminds me of the when BMW designed their motorcycles to be so ugly they'd find beauty of their own, K1200R for example [0] [0] https://ibb.co/zZMtqQk https://ibb.co/zZMtqQk
- OrvalWintermute 5y agoThe confusion was about the pushback. They expected a 2 foot wave, and they are getting a tsunami. We drank the Apple Privacy Kool-aid, and now we are holding them to it. This is totally a battle worth fighting!
- tiahura 5y ago“They expected a 2 foot wave, and they are getting a tsunami.” Are you sure? My local Apple store is just as crowded as it was two weeks ago.
- pgt 5y agoI for one am looking at alternatives.
- Bud 5y agoGood luck with that. Every alternative is an order of magnitude worse and also less honest about it.
- formerly_proven 5y agoMaybe a smartphone is not worth it if the price is so high.
- 3000000001 5y agoThe price being what exactly? That you’ll get caught for storing CSAM in the device makers cloud? I think the pros list stays longer than the cons list.
- aesh2Xa1 5y agoYour rebuttal is, at best, a specific, straw man instance of "If you were doing nothing wrong then you have nothing to hide." I needn't be holding child pornography to be concerned about a third party viewing my photos, writing, or other media on a device that is just mine and not published, public content.
- innagadadavida 5y agoThis is limited to users of iCloud photos. If you want to store your photos on Apple servers, shouldn’t they have the right to exclude CSAM content? Apple owns those servers and is legally liable. Why is this such a big issue?
- hypothesis 5y agoNote how they use your device to do the dirty work for them, instead of doing what everyone else is doing and scanning stuff on their servers.
- gowld 5y agoBecause they don't want to see your private files.
- ithkuil 5y agoBecause this way they can encrypt things on your phone and claim that they can't see your photos once on the server (because whatever they had to do with those photos, was already done on your own phone). (There are many ways this can be a slippery slope, but we don't have to pretend they could just so what ever body else is doing just as easily and they just want to do it on your phone because they are lazy or whatever. This is a solution to a legitimate problem and also it turns out that people are rightfully worried about what's next; those two facts can coexist)
- btkramer9 5y agoThe issue is that the scanning happens on your device just before upload. So now your own device is scanning for illegal activity _on_ your phone not the servers. The second issue is that it will alert authorities. In regards to CSAM content those issues may not sound terrible. But the second it is expanded to texts, things you say, websites you visit or apps you use it's a lot scarier. And what if instead of CSAM content it is extended to alert authorities for _any_ activity deemed undesirable by your government
- gambiting 5y ago
- pcurve 5y agoThey knew they were being hypocritical, so they were reluctant to even divulge the fact that other cloud providers have already been doing it; they wanted to position themselves as the pioneer. I can't imagine how they thought this would go well. It's another example of Apple being stuck in an echo chamber and not being able to objectively assess how their actions will be perceived. How many times have they made product and PR blunders like this?
- tungah 5y agoIt was pure hubris on their part.
- karmakaze 5y agoThe confusion was that many were previously taking Apple at their word when past actions should make that a questionble premise.
- xibalba 5y agoA true story... Me (Last month): "Apple is taking privacy very seriously. I'm going to vote with my dollars and switch from Android." Me (This month): "..."
- godelski 5y agoHonestly I was going to make the switch next gen of phones (been Android since the get go). Glad I waited. At least a Google phone I can flash
- doublerabbit 5y agoAll good and well but what do you do when Google decides to the same in few years time when this has blown over?
- lostmsu 5y agoHe will flash.
- godelski 5y agoIt really seems like there are a lot of bad faith arguments in this thread. Of all places I expect Hacker News to understand that you can put custom open sourced operating systems on a phone (aka: flashing). If I can't talk nerdy here, then where can I?
- doublerabbit 5y agoGoogle already makes effort to stop flashing of their phones. Just because you can now doesn't mean you can in the future. What do you do then?
- godelski 5y agoWhat efforts? Pixels have always been the easiest to flash. Phones have always been hacked. Everything is always hacked. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
- hughrr 5y agoIf Craig tells me I’m misunderstanding this I distrust them further because I completely understand the full arena of possibilities and not just the narrow intent.
- zionic 5y agoBecause of this interview I’ve added Craig to my mental list of executives who need to lose their job over this little stunt of theirs. Apple has spent billions in engineering and marketing to establish themselves as the privacy leader, all wiped away by this idiotic system so full of holes you could serve it on crackers.
- gauravjain13 5y agoThank you.
- philipov 5y agoIt's a typical "We're sorry you got mad" non-apology that deftly avoids admitting fault for the thing people are actually mad about.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago"On 5 August, the company revealed new image detection software that can alert Apple if known illegal images are uploaded to its iCloud storage." People assumed this opens the door for Apple to alerted of any known file uploaded to its iCloud storage. IOW, they assumed Apple can check what someone is uploading,1 despite alleged "end-to-end encryption" and a gazilion promises of "privacy". No one except the people managing the "detection software" know what files the hashes represent. Theres no way for the owner of an Apple computer to verify what files Apple is actually checking for. Is this confusion. It sounds more like lack of trust. 1 Mind you, for a majority of computer owners the uploading is likely occuring by default, automatically, outside of the owner's awareness. As opposed to the owner consciously deciding to upload a particular file to a computer in an Apple datacenter. Tech cmpanies know that users rarely change defaults. Remember how Apple had zero accountability: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26133-jennifer-lawrence-photo-hack-highlights-risks-of-cloud/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26133-jennifer-lawren... https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/09/what-jennifer-lawrence-can-teach-you-about-cloud-security/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/09/what-... Ricky Gervais' advice made sense. Wonder why he deleted it.
- bsder 5y agoThe problem is that Apple regrets the negative PR but doesn't actually regret the scanning at all. And that's the crux of the problem.
- mightybyte 5y agoVote with your money. If you own AAPL stock, sell it. And loudly refuse to buy Apple devices. That is the only language organizations like this will understand.
- katbyte 5y agoyou say no confusion yet you are saying "scan users' devices" which is incorrect as its just photos being uploaded to icloud.
- steve_adams_86 5y agoI’d personally switch that “just” to “specifically”; while you’re correct, “just” connotes insignificance but the scanning is arguably significant.
- zionic 5y agoRemoving iCloud does not remove the scanner or it’s database full of hashes. Limiting the scanner to iCloud is a policy decision one NSL away from changing.