3 ms·

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 i

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?

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?