4 ms·

Isn't that when the state prohibits your service? So then no body cares about your mathematical proof because it's a crime to use it. This is what has happened

Isn't that when the state prohibits your service? So then no body cares about your mathematical proof because it's a crime to use it. This is what has happened in many countries already.

3np 5y ago
Sure, but that's a case of "we're prohibited from providing end-to-end encryption and preserving user privacy so we can scan for prohibited content as mandated by authorities", not "we are keeping children safe while still preserving user privacy" Legal terms such as "murder", "fraud" and "rape" do change as effect of regulatory changes. "Encryption" and "privacy" do not. There's a limit to how much you can bend semantics in your PR before it breaks and you get backlash.
- onethought 5y ago
  But if you're a company like apple, it'd be bad business to wait until large government bans your service/device before you respond to it. Much better to read the tea leaves and get a head of it.
  - 3np 5y ago
    Again, their double-speak and redefining words don't help with the reception. They're deliberately misrepresenting what's happening, appearing surprised when people misunderstand, and bundling together legitimate criticism with misunderstandings. I can draw some parallels to how Google went out with FLoC. Honestly I can't tell where Hanlon's razor should cut here.
    - onethought 5y ago
      What’s the double speak? It’s quite clear they are trying to maintain e2e encryption while also achieving CSAM scanning. Google/Facebook/Microsoft do this by scanning everything unencrypted. Apple do it while maintaining encryption and are being punished for it. It’s insane.
      - Zak 5y ago
        iCloud is not end-to-end encrypted, and Apple has not announced plans to add that option. Apple has the technical ability to scan images on the server.
        onethought 5y ago
        Yes, they have the ability, but they found a way NOT to do that. Instead maintaining user privacy. And the world hates them for it, and would prefer they just unencrypted and scanned everything… doesn’t make sense.
        jgreen401 5y ago
        iCloud (at least for photos) is (effectively) "end to end encrypted". All photos are encrypted or decrypted only on the device (or after being downloaded to a browser), they never exist as human viewable files on iCloud. No one, except the owner of the account, can decrypt the file. This is why the checking for illegal file has to happen before they are upload. It cannot be done on the server, the encrypted file can never match the hash. What Apple has done that is real genius is that for each image identified as illegal, a part of the key is encrypted and sent with the file to Apple. After a threshold is met, the account is locked, the user notified of the appeals process, and Apple can decrypt and have the files verified. 1 or 2 false positives changes nothing.

Isn't that when the state prohibits your service? So then no body cares about your mathematical proof because it's a crime to use it. This is what has happened in many countries already.

3np 5y ago

Sure, but that's a case of "we're prohibited from providing end-to-end encryption and preserving user privacy so we can scan for prohibited content as mandated by authorities", not "we are keeping children safe while still preserving user privacy" Legal terms such as "murder", "fraud" and "rape" do change as effect of regulatory changes. "Encryption" and "privacy" do not. There's a limit to how much you can bend semantics in your PR before it breaks and you get backlash.

onethought 5y ago
But if you're a company like apple, it'd be bad business to wait until large government bans your service/device before you respond to it. Much better to read the tea leaves and get a head of it.
- 3np 5y ago
  Again, their double-speak and redefining words don't help with the reception. They're deliberately misrepresenting what's happening, appearing surprised when people misunderstand, and bundling together legitimate criticism with misunderstandings. I can draw some parallels to how Google went out with FLoC. Honestly I can't tell where Hanlon's razor should cut here.
  - onethought 5y ago
    What’s the double speak? It’s quite clear they are trying to maintain e2e encryption while also achieving CSAM scanning. Google/Facebook/Microsoft do this by scanning everything unencrypted. Apple do it while maintaining encryption and are being punished for it. It’s insane.
    - Zak 5y ago
      iCloud is not end-to-end encrypted, and Apple has not announced plans to add that option. Apple has the technical ability to scan images on the server.
      - onethought 5y ago
        Yes, they have the ability, but they found a way NOT to do that. Instead maintaining user privacy. And the world hates them for it, and would prefer they just unencrypted and scanned everything… doesn’t make sense.
      - jgreen401 5y ago
        iCloud (at least for photos) is (effectively) "end to end encrypted". All photos are encrypted or decrypted only on the device (or after being downloaded to a browser), they never exist as human viewable files on iCloud. No one, except the owner of the account, can decrypt the file. This is why the checking for illegal file has to happen before they are upload. It cannot be done on the server, the encrypted file can never match the hash. What Apple has done that is real genius is that for each image identified as illegal, a part of the key is encrypted and sent with the file to Apple. After a threshold is met, the account is locked, the user notified of the appeals process, and Apple can decrypt and have the files verified. 1 or 2 false positives changes nothing.