8 ms·
That's not the route in which this will be exploited, and used at scale. A corrupt government has to know they want you "to just get you". Instead they will em
by zbobet2012 5y ago
That's not the route in which this will be exploited, and used at scale.
A corrupt government has to know they want you "to just get you". Instead they will embed a collision in anti-government meme. That collision will flag you, and now they know you harbor doubts and will come get you.
This is why it's a privacy concern. It's no the tech (like you said photo dna's been about forver), it's the scanning of the phone.
- endisneigh 5y agoWhat you’re saying is already possible. Where are the examples of this happening? PhotoDNA has existed since 2008.
- biesnecker 5y agoWho is scanning your phone right now with PhotoDNA?
- endisneigh 5y agoMicrosoft, Facebook and Google. More depending on what services you use
- biesnecker 5y agoThey're not actively scanning your phone, they're actively scanning files you send them.
- endisneigh 5y agoThat’s the same as what Apple is going to do - scan right before sending to iCloud
- danuker 5y agoThe scanning on the device before the upload makes it easier to do surveillance.
- WesolyKubeczek 5y agoThe same as what Apple is saying it's going to do, there's a difference.
- endisneigh 5y agoIf you don't trust Apple then they could've already done what you're concerned about before they announced this. I don't really get it. Either you trusted Apple before this and you continue to, or you didn't before, and continue not to. If it's the later, then you shouldn't be using Apple services.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago> If you don't trust Apple then they could've already done what you're concerned about before they announced this. Not without the risk of it being discovered (either through a leak or because someone analyzes the software on the phone), and then having a much bigger scandal on hand.
- knodi123 5y agoMan, wouldn't you love to be the developer who gets assigned the feature to commit these horrible secret privacy violations with deeply evil ethical problems? You don't even have to implement the feature. All you need is really good proof that you were asked to, and now your job at Apple is secure, along with a huge raise, for years if not for life. Something commensurate with what you and they both know they would lose in the PR damage and possible EU fines.
- vineyardmike 5y ago> possible EU fines Until the EU makes it a legal requirement. Which they're getting close to
- KallDrexx 5y agoThat's not actually answering the question in the GP about why this is different. Photos people send me to my Android are automatically sent through 3rd parties, either through MMS, Facebook messenger, Google Photos, or One Drive. Photos arriving on my device are almost guaranteed to be uploaded to both OneDrive and Google Photos based on how defaults of Android phones are setup. So someone could already send hash collisions my way (purposely or inadvertently) and authoritarian governments already have access in their respective clouds (at least China does). And yet, there are not stories of people being falsely accused of child porn due to PhotoDNA hash collisions. Why does "on device for apple devices only" change the calculus.
- raxxorrax 5y agoWhy waste a resource like that and throw them in prison when you have compromising material? That would be stupid. Epstein was probably a high society pimp and there probably was enough evidence for convictions. That wouldn't have happened if it didn't get public.
- ipaddr 5y agoNone of those are scannig your phone. None of them aside from google even sell a phone. Everyone suspected they were scanning images for this and a number of other things on their services.
- flycaliguy 5y agoA corrupt government will also enjoy the “chilling effect” created by people’s fear of tainting their phone with illegal images.
- kempbellt 5y agoI feel like a corrupt government would want people to trust their phones.
- benjaminpv 5y agoAlternatively, a corrupt government might want folks to distrust their mass market phone such that they can have an individual come along and offer them a 'completely secure and private' alternative[1]. [1]: https://www.pcmag.com/news/fbi-sold-criminals-fake-encrypted-phones-that-actually-copied-their-messages https://www.pcmag.com/news/fbi-sold-criminals-fake-encrypted...
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y agoIIRC many totalitarian governments, historical and current, made/make their surveillance blatantly obvious, because the chilling effect deterring people is much more valuable than the added intelligence value from keeping people careless. After all, they want to suppress dissent, and they can't catch and arrest everyone - it's much more effective if people don't even dare to voice their dissent. This is also why you see people in situations like the Arab Spring use known-insecure/monitored means of communication, because they realize that the value and power that comes from communicating and finding other likeminded people is worth painting a target on yourself (because you can't succeed without it, and if you succeed, there will be too many to prosecute).
- mrtranscendence 5y ago> That collision will flag you, and now they know you harbor doubts and will come get you. Only if that government has worked out some deal with Apple whereby such an anti-government meme would end in the government being notified accordingly. Don't forget that you need a sufficiently high number of collisions, for one, and that those collisions are audited by Apple before being sent to law enforcement.
- labcomputer 5y agoWhy do they need to work out a deal with Apple? Just bribe or blackmail the minimum wage reviewers.