4 ms·

Neither Google nor Microsoft scan pictures people have on their devices running Android or Windows. I'm not sure how that's even applicable to Facebook and Drop

Neither Google nor Microsoft scan pictures people have on their devices running Android or Windows. I'm not sure how that's even applicable to Facebook and Dropbox.

azinman2 5y ago
You’re asking for an auditing chain presumably due to concerns about governments putting in photos of things that aren’t CP. Apple is only doing this for photos that get uploaded to iCloud, with this neural hash that gets uploaded with it. The actual verification of a CP match occurs on the server due to the hashes being blinded. So in many ways, it’s very similar to what these other cloud providers effectively do — search for CP matches on uploaded data. If you’re concerned about non-CP being scanned for, then you should already be concerned about that with everyone else. Thus if you’re asking for auditing of Apple, then you should widen your request. If you do, then sure, I can understand that. If you’re not concerned about the existing system, then I think you’re being non-consistent. Most people in comments to me seem to be non-consistent, and are being overly knee jerk about this… myself included initially.
dwaite 5y ago
Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Dropbox, etc. all scan photos which are cloud hosted for CSAM. Apple's new system scans only photos which are cloud hosted for CSAM. This would be the source of the inconsistency - that the code to do scanning is on the client side of the uploader rather than the server side of the uploader does not change any abuse scenarios, but exclusively serves "slippery slope" arguments of full on-device surveillance.
- noptd 5y ago
  >does not change any abuse scenarios It absolutely does. When the scanning is server-side, companies can only scan the files you choose to send to their servers but with a client-side system in place, all it takes is a change in company policy and a few simple directory config changes to result in ANY file on your device being scanned. Slippery slope or not, the client-side system massively lowers the bar for abuse and that cannot be ignored.
  - azinman2 5y ago
    Except it's only occurring while simultaneously uploading to iCloud. The hash is metadata that goes along with it.

Neither Google nor Microsoft scan pictures people have on their devices running Android or Windows. I'm not sure how that's even applicable to Facebook and Dropbox.

azinman2 5y ago

You’re asking for an auditing chain presumably due to concerns about governments putting in photos of things that aren’t CP. Apple is only doing this for photos that get uploaded to iCloud, with this neural hash that gets uploaded with it. The actual verification of a CP match occurs on the server due to the hashes being blinded. So in many ways, it’s very similar to what these other cloud providers effectively do — search for CP matches on uploaded data. If you’re concerned about non-CP being scanned for, then you should already be concerned about that with everyone else. Thus if you’re asking for auditing of Apple, then you should widen your request. If you do, then sure, I can understand that. If you’re not concerned about the existing system, then I think you’re being non-consistent. Most people in comments to me seem to be non-consistent, and are being overly knee jerk about this… myself included initially.

dwaite 5y ago

Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Dropbox, etc. all scan photos which are cloud hosted for CSAM. Apple's new system scans only photos which are cloud hosted for CSAM. This would be the source of the inconsistency - that the code to do scanning is on the client side of the uploader rather than the server side of the uploader does not change any abuse scenarios, but exclusively serves "slippery slope" arguments of full on-device surveillance.

noptd 5y ago
>does not change any abuse scenarios It absolutely does. When the scanning is server-side, companies can only scan the files you choose to send to their servers but with a client-side system in place, all it takes is a change in company policy and a few simple directory config changes to result in ANY file on your device being scanned. Slippery slope or not, the client-side system massively lowers the bar for abuse and that cannot be ignored.
- azinman2 5y ago
  Except it's only occurring while simultaneously uploading to iCloud. The hash is metadata that goes along with it.