7 ms·

This is correct. I have no problems of them scanning my icloud mail or photos. I just don't like the idea of there being a system level scanner for a hash dat

by rdudek 5y ago

This is correct. I have no problems of them scanning my icloud mail or photos. I just don't like the idea of there being a system level scanner for a hash database on my device assuming that I'm guilty until proven innocent. I was going to upgrade my iPhone this fall to latest model, now I'm very hesitant to do so and looking at alternatives.

istingray 5y ago
You might find this helpful in your search -- HN Discussion of open source phones: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28164208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28164208
robertoandred 5y ago
But you do like the idea of a server-level scanner for a hash database assuming that you're guilty until proven innocent?
- smoldesu 5y ago
  Nobody does, but that's the current status-quo anyways. Almost every cloud-based service provider will do this anyways, Apple's only change is that they've moved their surveillance from their computers to mine. If I can't know how secure my phone is at all times, then I frankly can't feel comfortable using it.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction people are making. Increasingly they are one and the same (if you know what I mean).
  - ramses0 5y ago
    ODINN => On Device, Intrusive, Neural Network. You cannot photocopy a dollar bill. Kinda makes sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation Now imagine a "live" neural network running on your phone or camera that prevents you from taking pictures of the Eiffel Tower at night due to "Suspected Copyright Abuse". https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/photographs-of-eiffel-tower-at-night/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/photographs-of-eiffel-towe... Next imagine that a local government issues a digital "All Points Bulletin" which scans all pictures on all phones for a "person of interest in a crime (against the state)", conveniently associated with the emergency alert broadcast network. First they came: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
  - simion314 5y ago
    >Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction Maybe I can make it clearer. It is like you are asked or demanded to install some antivirus on your computer, but this is not a typical antivirus , it is not scanning to protect you but to find evidence against you and destroy your life. A list of facts, let me know if you disagree with the reality or my conclussion Apple could have scanned iCloud already, why did they not do it so far? Either there is a super low number of CP on iCloud which implies this feature is not needed OR Apple was lazy, incompetent or had some other reason and let a lot of bad guys escape . I would conclude from this that Apple , if they really care of children, should freaking start scanning the existing iCloud images now. From the above I am inclined to believe that this is not an action to protect the children, the reality does not fit, if there is so much CP on iCloud but Apple just woke up then WTF is that all PR about protecting children.
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    With all the attention it has been getting I think its only a matter of time before CSAM-SWATing starts to happen on those cloud services. The amount of people who know that scanning is happening just dramatically increased in the past month. And for all we know it may have already happened and someone is currently rotting in jail who shouldn't be there. Middle aged dude raided by cops who find CSAM on their cloud accounts, claims that his phone got hacked. Lying sack of shit pedo, of course he'd say that, right?
    - JKCalhoun 5y ago
      We've had plenty of time for it to have already happened since various services have been scanning for CSAM for some time.
      - lamontcg 5y ago
        > The amount of people who know that scanning is happening just dramatically increased in the past month.
hanklazard 5y ago
My pre-owned Pixel arrives tomorrow and I'm looking forward to playing around with open-source alternatives. I think I'm going to start with this: https://lineage.microg.org/ https://lineage.microg.org/
- Infernal 5y ago
  I’m aiming for a used Pixel 5 and GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS seems to have the most focus on breaking entirely away from Google services.
  - n8cpdx 5y ago
    GrapheneOS has been a dream so far on my used Pixel 4. Turns out Android can be pleasant when you don't have to deal with oem ui changes and non-optional bloatware.
anonuser123456 5y ago
There is an alternative, more reasonable way to look at the Apple proposal. The scanning occurs in order to upload files to iCloud photos. Your device is attesting that data you upload to iCloud photos is not pre-established CSAM. If you do not like the privacy implications of having your content inspected locally, on your device, simply choose another cloud photo provider and turn off iCloud photos. You are told about the system and you are free to turn the service off. That doesn't sound like a massive privacy invasion to me.
- lern_too_spel 5y ago
  iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos and crippled alternatives.
  - anonuser123456 5y ago
    This is the tradeoff of the Apple ecosystem. For most users the trade off is a no-brainer because they don't care about the theoretical concerns that, in expectation, do not apply to them. I mean, what is the probability of this technology causing an innocent user harm? 1/1,000,000 ? 1/10,000,000? 1/100,000,000?
    - amznthrwaway 5y ago
      All evidence is that the chance of harm is literally zero. This stuff is used to scan pics on every photo hosting service already, and there’s no known instances of a life ruined over a hash collision. Every one of the harm narratives comes from a slippery slope fallacy.
    - skoskie 5y ago
      According to Apple, 1/1 Trillion chance of a false report per year. So the chance for a single photo to be incorrectly matched is much higher. But by setting a threshold at ~30 images before triggering a manual review, they get the odds extremely low. My bet is that error threshold will remain a constant for them. As tech gets better, they will reduce the threshold accordingly to maintain that error rate. In five years, I’m guessing they will only need three images to trigger a review.

by rdudek 5y ago

istingray 5y ago

You might find this helpful in your search -- HN Discussion of open source phones: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28164208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28164208

robertoandred 5y ago

But you do like the idea of a server-level scanner for a hash database assuming that you're guilty until proven innocent?

smoldesu 5y ago
Nobody does, but that's the current status-quo anyways. Almost every cloud-based service provider will do this anyways, Apple's only change is that they've moved their surveillance from their computers to mine. If I can't know how secure my phone is at all times, then I frankly can't feel comfortable using it.
JKCalhoun 5y ago
Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction people are making. Increasingly they are one and the same (if you know what I mean).
- ramses0 5y ago
  ODINN => On Device, Intrusive, Neural Network. You cannot photocopy a dollar bill. Kinda makes sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation Now imagine a "live" neural network running on your phone or camera that prevents you from taking pictures of the Eiffel Tower at night due to "Suspected Copyright Abuse". https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/photographs-of-eiffel-tower-at-night/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/photographs-of-eiffel-towe... Next imagine that a local government issues a digital "All Points Bulletin" which scans all pictures on all phones for a "person of interest in a crime (against the state)", conveniently associated with the emergency alert broadcast network. First they came: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
- simion314 5y ago
  >Yeah, I don't get the cloud/device distinction Maybe I can make it clearer. It is like you are asked or demanded to install some antivirus on your computer, but this is not a typical antivirus , it is not scanning to protect you but to find evidence against you and destroy your life. A list of facts, let me know if you disagree with the reality or my conclussion Apple could have scanned iCloud already, why did they not do it so far? Either there is a super low number of CP on iCloud which implies this feature is not needed OR Apple was lazy, incompetent or had some other reason and let a lot of bad guys escape . I would conclude from this that Apple , if they really care of children, should freaking start scanning the existing iCloud images now. From the above I am inclined to believe that this is not an action to protect the children, the reality does not fit, if there is so much CP on iCloud but Apple just woke up then WTF is that all PR about protecting children.
- lamontcg 5y ago
  With all the attention it has been getting I think its only a matter of time before CSAM-SWATing starts to happen on those cloud services. The amount of people who know that scanning is happening just dramatically increased in the past month. And for all we know it may have already happened and someone is currently rotting in jail who shouldn't be there. Middle aged dude raided by cops who find CSAM on their cloud accounts, claims that his phone got hacked. Lying sack of shit pedo, of course he'd say that, right?
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    We've had plenty of time for it to have already happened since various services have been scanning for CSAM for some time.
    - lamontcg 5y ago
      > The amount of people who know that scanning is happening just dramatically increased in the past month.

hanklazard 5y ago

My pre-owned Pixel arrives tomorrow and I'm looking forward to playing around with open-source alternatives. I think I'm going to start with this: https://lineage.microg.org/ https://lineage.microg.org/

Infernal 5y ago
I’m aiming for a used Pixel 5 and GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS seems to have the most focus on breaking entirely away from Google services.
- n8cpdx 5y ago
  GrapheneOS has been a dream so far on my used Pixel 4. Turns out Android can be pleasant when you don't have to deal with oem ui changes and non-optional bloatware.

anonuser123456 5y ago

There is an alternative, more reasonable way to look at the Apple proposal. The scanning occurs in order to upload files to iCloud photos. Your device is attesting that data you upload to iCloud photos is not pre-established CSAM. If you do not like the privacy implications of having your content inspected locally, on your device, simply choose another cloud photo provider and turn off iCloud photos. You are told about the system and you are free to turn the service off. That doesn't sound like a massive privacy invasion to me.

lern_too_spel 5y ago
iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos and crippled alternatives.
- anonuser123456 5y ago
  This is the tradeoff of the Apple ecosystem. For most users the trade off is a no-brainer because they don't care about the theoretical concerns that, in expectation, do not apply to them. I mean, what is the probability of this technology causing an innocent user harm? 1/1,000,000 ? 1/10,000,000? 1/100,000,000?
  - amznthrwaway 5y ago
    All evidence is that the chance of harm is literally zero. This stuff is used to scan pics on every photo hosting service already, and there’s no known instances of a life ruined over a hash collision. Every one of the harm narratives comes from a slippery slope fallacy.
  - skoskie 5y ago
    According to Apple, 1/1 Trillion chance of a false report per year. So the chance for a single photo to be incorrectly matched is much higher. But by setting a threshold at ~30 images before triggering a manual review, they get the odds extremely low. My bet is that error threshold will remain a constant for them. As tech gets better, they will reduce the threshold accordingly to maintain that error rate. In five years, I’m guessing they will only need three images to trigger a review.