4 ms·

Of course. Politicians and officials hate whistleblowers far more than pedophiles, and it's obvious this mechanism will be used to find future Chelsea Mannings

by fmajid 5y ago

Of course. Politicians and officials hate whistleblowers far more than pedophiles, and it's obvious this mechanism will be used to find future Chelsea Mannings and Reality Winners with better opsec to make examples out of them.

HNPoliticalBias 5y ago
Any population that allows themselves to be ruled by tyrants, will be, as we're seeing with the West slowly morphing into the USSR.
sparker72678 5y ago
How? I'd love to be convinced that this mechanism could be easily extended to any content at any time without it being totally obvious to the rest of us that it's being used that way.
- jjcon 5y ago
  Not OP and not speaking with any authority on this more just curious: If alongside this Apple rolled out the ability for them to initiate a scan on any phone for any thing (not a tool for mass surveillance but targeted surveillance) how would we know given Apples closed ecosystem? This doesn't necessarily speak to the issue here but more to the Apple ethos in general, but I am curious.
  - simondotau 5y ago
    This twitter thread is a useful read: https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/1424873629003702273 https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/14248736290037022...
    - techdragon 5y ago
      Very good breakdown of the situation. But cold comfort for anyone not in the USA. Because we know once Apple ships this it will be expanded to other countries with similar CSAM laws … many of which do not have robust Fourth Amendment type rights enshrined in their legal systems.
      - simondotau 5y ago
        This is true, but there aren't many countries which Apple would even consider risking its global reputation in order to retain that market. US, China, Europe, maybe a couple of others. To begin with, there's no prospect of this being done in secret. So we're talking about Apple complying to demands being made in public. In the case of the EU, it would have to be passed into law in a way that makes equal demands upon all of Apple's competitors. And in that case, everyone must comply with the law irrespective of whether any existing CSAM detection apparatus was in place. (Thus it's a sheer cliff, not a slippery slope.) If Saudi Arabia or Sudan tried to turn the screws, the business case for Apple is absolutely clear-cut: they would leave. It wouldn't even be up for debate. There would be far too much at risk globally than they'd ever hope to gain/retain in that domestic market from compliance. Not only would they never risk serious damage to their global reputation (something they'll be extremely sensitive to, as the last two weeks have taught them) it would represent a massive opportunity for Apple to earn weeks of free media coverage that aligns with their security narrative.
        fmajid 5y ago
        National Security Letters or their foreign equivalents routinely come with gag orders.
    - puddingforears 5y ago
      That’s a lot of assumptions of good faith within publicly known constraints
  - zepto 5y ago
    Good point, but equally if instead of this Apple rolled out the ability for them to initiate a scan on any phone for any thing (not a tool for mass surveillance but targeted surveillance) how would we know given Apples closed ecosystem?
simondotau 5y ago
Any such searches, because they are compelled by the Government and occur on private property, would be an unequivocal violation of the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution.
- hda2 5y ago
  What if those searches were conducted by another country? Say another five-eye nation?
  - simondotau 5y ago
    By raising five-eyes, you are suggesting that another country could launder the request on behalf of the USA in order to circumvent the 4th Amendment. Okay then, let's play that out. Australia demands that Apple augment CSAM detection so that every iPhone in the USA starts scanning for (and reporting back to Australia about) some other set of images. There's absolutely no scenario where Apple wouldn't walk out of the room laughing. End of hypothetical.
    - fmajid 5y ago
      Google and Facebook caved to Australia on its Murdoch-inspired racketeering, there is no evidence whatsoever of Apple having a stiffer spine. Australia also has some of the worst laws on Internet freedom and privacy in the world, not just in the West. Also, the Australians would require Apple to use the Australian version of the NCMEC operated by their government. Remember, Apple only has the fingerprints of the CSAM files, not the actual files themselves (only the NCMEC can legally hold them), so they have no way to check whether the Australians inserted the fingerprints for the Afghanistan Papers to the database at the behest of their US buddies.

by fmajid 5y ago

HNPoliticalBias 5y ago

Any population that allows themselves to be ruled by tyrants, will be, as we're seeing with the West slowly morphing into the USSR.

sparker72678 5y ago

How? I'd love to be convinced that this mechanism could be easily extended to any content at any time without it being totally obvious to the rest of us that it's being used that way.

jjcon 5y ago
Not OP and not speaking with any authority on this more just curious: If alongside this Apple rolled out the ability for them to initiate a scan on any phone for any thing (not a tool for mass surveillance but targeted surveillance) how would we know given Apples closed ecosystem? This doesn't necessarily speak to the issue here but more to the Apple ethos in general, but I am curious.
- simondotau 5y ago
  This twitter thread is a useful read: https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/1424873629003702273 https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/14248736290037022...
  - techdragon 5y ago
    Very good breakdown of the situation. But cold comfort for anyone not in the USA. Because we know once Apple ships this it will be expanded to other countries with similar CSAM laws … many of which do not have robust Fourth Amendment type rights enshrined in their legal systems.
    - simondotau 5y ago
      This is true, but there aren't many countries which Apple would even consider risking its global reputation in order to retain that market. US, China, Europe, maybe a couple of others. To begin with, there's no prospect of this being done in secret. So we're talking about Apple complying to demands being made in public. In the case of the EU, it would have to be passed into law in a way that makes equal demands upon all of Apple's competitors. And in that case, everyone must comply with the law irrespective of whether any existing CSAM detection apparatus was in place. (Thus it's a sheer cliff, not a slippery slope.) If Saudi Arabia or Sudan tried to turn the screws, the business case for Apple is absolutely clear-cut: they would leave. It wouldn't even be up for debate. There would be far too much at risk globally than they'd ever hope to gain/retain in that domestic market from compliance. Not only would they never risk serious damage to their global reputation (something they'll be extremely sensitive to, as the last two weeks have taught them) it would represent a massive opportunity for Apple to earn weeks of free media coverage that aligns with their security narrative.
      - fmajid 5y ago
        National Security Letters or their foreign equivalents routinely come with gag orders.
  - puddingforears 5y ago
    That’s a lot of assumptions of good faith within publicly known constraints
- zepto 5y ago
  Good point, but equally if instead of this Apple rolled out the ability for them to initiate a scan on any phone for any thing (not a tool for mass surveillance but targeted surveillance) how would we know given Apples closed ecosystem?

simondotau 5y ago

Any such searches, because they are compelled by the Government and occur on private property, would be an unequivocal violation of the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

hda2 5y ago
What if those searches were conducted by another country? Say another five-eye nation?
- simondotau 5y ago
  By raising five-eyes, you are suggesting that another country could launder the request on behalf of the USA in order to circumvent the 4th Amendment. Okay then, let's play that out. Australia demands that Apple augment CSAM detection so that every iPhone in the USA starts scanning for (and reporting back to Australia about) some other set of images. There's absolutely no scenario where Apple wouldn't walk out of the room laughing. End of hypothetical.
  - fmajid 5y ago
    Google and Facebook caved to Australia on its Murdoch-inspired racketeering, there is no evidence whatsoever of Apple having a stiffer spine. Australia also has some of the worst laws on Internet freedom and privacy in the world, not just in the West. Also, the Australians would require Apple to use the Australian version of the NCMEC operated by their government. Remember, Apple only has the fingerprints of the CSAM files, not the actual files themselves (only the NCMEC can legally hold them), so they have no way to check whether the Australians inserted the fingerprints for the Afghanistan Papers to the database at the behest of their US buddies.