17 ms·

Apple’s acquiescence to the Russian government’s demand to remove this app was predicted when it first came to light. Exactly at the same time as Apple was assu

Apple’s acquiescence to the Russian government’s demand to remove this app was predicted when it first came to light. Exactly at the same time as Apple was assuring world+dog that it would never acquiesce to governmental pressure to extend and expand the scope of its CSAM scanning tool on user’s devices.

nicce 5y ago
You are comparing ”apples” to oranges. App store apps are built by third parties whereas CSAM is Apple’s own code and design on OS level, applying on global level. App store apps have been under removal threat in every country for many years if they can be considered as illegal.
- factorialboy 5y ago
  Apple has to comply with local laws, regardless of who authored the code.
  - nicce 5y ago
    Yes, but they are not forced to add new features, only to remove, which is kinda big difference.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      They can be forced to do either.
    - Hamuko 5y ago
      https://www.macrumors.com/2021/03/16/apple-to-offer-government-approved-apps-russia/ https://www.macrumors.com/2021/03/16/apple-to-offer-governme... Is this a removal of a feature?
      - nicce 5y ago
        > Apple struck a deal with the government that will show users a prompt when first configuring a device in Russia to pre-install apps from a list of government-approved software. Users will have the ability to decline the installation of certain apps. Apps you can decline? And uninstall? We are talking about quite different things here. Not to mention every Android with pre-installed bloatware.
        foerbert 5y ago
        I mean, there's some big questions left out there. It says 'certain' apps. Is it all? Or just some? If you do opt-out, does anybody get notified? Is it reasonable users are concerned somebody might get notified? There's a lot going on there. And just to point out, this has moved on from saying Apple only removing features, to debating how bad the features they've added are.
        nicce 5y ago
        It is very uncertain, who has added the word "certain", as quoted statement is just talking about offering: > users will be offered a choice of applications from Russian developers, which they will be able to choose for further installation on their iPhone or iPad
  - sam0x17 5y ago
    That's not entirely true. Apple is big enough that they can ignore, bend, or even change local laws when it suits them, especially as it pertains to their operations outside the U.S. It makes one wonder who or what made this demand worth fulfilling for Apple, but it could just as easily be someone incompetent at Apple blindly fulfilling a takedown request from the Russian government because it's in their job description to follow such demands and they didn't realize that a simple app takedown request had significant geopolitical implications. Who knows. Either way, Apple has definitely strayed far from the vision of their 1984-themed commercial back in the day where they shattered big brother with a hammer...
- Hamuko 5y ago
  The CSAM databases are not Apple's own either.
  - threeseed 5y ago
    Apple uses databases from 2 or more child safety organisations. Specifically to prevent governments from being able to include entries.
    - yetihehe 5y ago
      What stops governments from requiring that "this one list" is required to be used, regardless of other organisations? Certainly not "Apple TOS".
    - heavyset_go 5y ago
      > Specifically to prevent governments from being able to include entries. Yes, governments and their intelligence agencies famously don't work together and share information[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
- hypothesis 5y ago
  So, same for Apple then, which would be under a threat from a government if they do not submit to whatever CSAM requirements, regardless of “pinky swear” promises?
  - nicce 5y ago
    People should start realisizing that they don’t have much control over for their iPhones, never hard. User interfaces are just an illusion. Reversing their black box code is too much work in real time. We have always had to trust Apple and their word on what they do. There isn’t evidence that they have broken the trust yet, so what gives reason for even more speculation than before?
    - hypothesis 5y ago
      I’m saying that Apple is going to do what is required by law, there is no speculation. This is true for booting an app from App Store, because it was required by a government, or looking through your data on your iPhone, due to a requirement from a government.
    - reissbaker 5y ago
      This article is evidence that Apple has and is continuously willing to bend to demands in dictatorships... That's why people are talking about it here. Heck, even in democracies it's willing to bend. It's been widely reported that the reason iCloud backups aren't encrypted is to make it easier for the FBI to surveil them, despite there being no American laws forbidding Apple from encrypting the backups.
      - nicce 5y ago
        > This article is evidence that Apple has and is continuously willing to bend to demands in dictatorships... That's why people are talking about it here. But this has happened for years already with similar ways. What has changed to make this big news? They have blocked many apps in the U.S as well, but it seems to be fine when for the majority it is OK. For example idea of withdrawal of the TikTok was fine for the most, while it was only for political reasons. People pick sides when it is the most suitable for them. > It's been widely reported that the reason iCloud backups aren't encrypted is to make it easier for the FBI to surveil them, despite there being no American laws forbidding Apple from encrypting the backups. And yet, Apple made a way to make encrypting possible while avoiding liabilities, and people made their best to not allow that happen. Such an irony. (Looking at CSAM feature. People seems to still ignore the fact, that it changes from server-side encryption into partial E2EE + server side encryption, tooking a way powerful arguments from FBI to not enable encryption on backups)
progx 5y ago
#freeAppStores for everybody!
yawaworht1978 5y ago
Have they ever explained why the csam would be implemented? Apple bends just fine if the government is powerful enough and the marketplace is big enough, see China.
- avianlyric 5y ago
  In their defence (I say this with some trepidation), if they want to see their products in another country, then they need to play by that countries rules. Regardless of how we in the west feel about those rules. If a Chinese company came to the US or EU and ignored US or EU rules and lawful directives from government, we would quite rightly be up in arms about that. With regards to CSAM, I think the same applies. After all the CSAM issue only exists because the US government has decided that invasive monitoring is the only way to counter CSAM. I note that no other western country takes such an authoritarian approach to CSAM, an approach that seems to be primarily driving by evangelist Christian keen on outlawing sex in general. As oppose to actually helping victims of CSAM.
  - hypothesis 5y ago
    Following laws in countries that one is operating is expected. However, following laws that contradict one’s marketing materials will lead to some understandable questions about those “values”.
    - dilap 5y ago
      I think avianlyric is suggesting Apple didn't have a choice, and that US gov is compelling them to add the CSAM features. Which seems likely to me. † Really "CSAM", since there's no way to verify nor ensure it's only scanning for CSAM. What they are building is a prohibited content scanner, and what it will scan for is whatever governments would like it to scan for.
    - avianlyric 5y ago
      Well do you have a copy of Apple's marketing material from Russia saying that won't censor the app store if compelled to do so by the Russian government? It not reasonable to hold Apple to pledges they've made to western customers, when talking about a service provided to non-western customers. As much as we wish it wasn't true, the scope for providing privacy is substantially greater in the west than it is elsewhere.
jjulius 5y ago
Thank you for this. I had a number of HN users insinuate that I was wrong to warn that Apple could expand beyond CSAM scanning and begin scanning for other material. People seemed to take a very firm stance that no, that could never ever ever happen and I'm wrong to even suggest the possibility. This incident is more than enough for me to remain concerned that that will happen.
- fsflover 5y ago
  More arguments that Apple will go further than CSAM were presented by Snowden: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202.

nicce 5y ago

You are comparing ”apples” to oranges. App store apps are built by third parties whereas CSAM is Apple’s own code and design on OS level, applying on global level. App store apps have been under removal threat in every country for many years if they can be considered as illegal.

factorialboy 5y ago
Apple has to comply with local laws, regardless of who authored the code.
- nicce 5y ago
  Yes, but they are not forced to add new features, only to remove, which is kinda big difference.
  - int_19h 5y ago
    They can be forced to do either.
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    https://www.macrumors.com/2021/03/16/apple-to-offer-government-approved-apps-russia/ https://www.macrumors.com/2021/03/16/apple-to-offer-governme... Is this a removal of a feature?
    - nicce 5y ago
      > Apple struck a deal with the government that will show users a prompt when first configuring a device in Russia to pre-install apps from a list of government-approved software. Users will have the ability to decline the installation of certain apps. Apps you can decline? And uninstall? We are talking about quite different things here. Not to mention every Android with pre-installed bloatware.
      - foerbert 5y ago
        I mean, there's some big questions left out there. It says 'certain' apps. Is it all? Or just some? If you do opt-out, does anybody get notified? Is it reasonable users are concerned somebody might get notified? There's a lot going on there. And just to point out, this has moved on from saying Apple only removing features, to debating how bad the features they've added are.
        nicce 5y ago
        It is very uncertain, who has added the word "certain", as quoted statement is just talking about offering: > users will be offered a choice of applications from Russian developers, which they will be able to choose for further installation on their iPhone or iPad
- sam0x17 5y ago
  That's not entirely true. Apple is big enough that they can ignore, bend, or even change local laws when it suits them, especially as it pertains to their operations outside the U.S. It makes one wonder who or what made this demand worth fulfilling for Apple, but it could just as easily be someone incompetent at Apple blindly fulfilling a takedown request from the Russian government because it's in their job description to follow such demands and they didn't realize that a simple app takedown request had significant geopolitical implications. Who knows. Either way, Apple has definitely strayed far from the vision of their 1984-themed commercial back in the day where they shattered big brother with a hammer...
Hamuko 5y ago
The CSAM databases are not Apple's own either.
- threeseed 5y ago
  Apple uses databases from 2 or more child safety organisations. Specifically to prevent governments from being able to include entries.
  - yetihehe 5y ago
    What stops governments from requiring that "this one list" is required to be used, regardless of other organisations? Certainly not "Apple TOS".
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > Specifically to prevent governments from being able to include entries. Yes, governments and their intelligence agencies famously don't work together and share information[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
hypothesis 5y ago
So, same for Apple then, which would be under a threat from a government if they do not submit to whatever CSAM requirements, regardless of “pinky swear” promises?
- nicce 5y ago
  People should start realisizing that they don’t have much control over for their iPhones, never hard. User interfaces are just an illusion. Reversing their black box code is too much work in real time. We have always had to trust Apple and their word on what they do. There isn’t evidence that they have broken the trust yet, so what gives reason for even more speculation than before?
  - hypothesis 5y ago
    I’m saying that Apple is going to do what is required by law, there is no speculation. This is true for booting an app from App Store, because it was required by a government, or looking through your data on your iPhone, due to a requirement from a government.
  - reissbaker 5y ago
    This article is evidence that Apple has and is continuously willing to bend to demands in dictatorships... That's why people are talking about it here. Heck, even in democracies it's willing to bend. It's been widely reported that the reason iCloud backups aren't encrypted is to make it easier for the FBI to surveil them, despite there being no American laws forbidding Apple from encrypting the backups.
    - nicce 5y ago
      > This article is evidence that Apple has and is continuously willing to bend to demands in dictatorships... That's why people are talking about it here. But this has happened for years already with similar ways. What has changed to make this big news? They have blocked many apps in the U.S as well, but it seems to be fine when for the majority it is OK. For example idea of withdrawal of the TikTok was fine for the most, while it was only for political reasons. People pick sides when it is the most suitable for them. > It's been widely reported that the reason iCloud backups aren't encrypted is to make it easier for the FBI to surveil them, despite there being no American laws forbidding Apple from encrypting the backups. And yet, Apple made a way to make encrypting possible while avoiding liabilities, and people made their best to not allow that happen. Such an irony. (Looking at CSAM feature. People seems to still ignore the fact, that it changes from server-side encryption into partial E2EE + server side encryption, tooking a way powerful arguments from FBI to not enable encryption on backups)

progx 5y ago

#freeAppStores for everybody!

yawaworht1978 5y ago

Have they ever explained why the csam would be implemented? Apple bends just fine if the government is powerful enough and the marketplace is big enough, see China.

avianlyric 5y ago
In their defence (I say this with some trepidation), if they want to see their products in another country, then they need to play by that countries rules. Regardless of how we in the west feel about those rules. If a Chinese company came to the US or EU and ignored US or EU rules and lawful directives from government, we would quite rightly be up in arms about that. With regards to CSAM, I think the same applies. After all the CSAM issue only exists because the US government has decided that invasive monitoring is the only way to counter CSAM. I note that no other western country takes such an authoritarian approach to CSAM, an approach that seems to be primarily driving by evangelist Christian keen on outlawing sex in general. As oppose to actually helping victims of CSAM.
- hypothesis 5y ago
  Following laws in countries that one is operating is expected. However, following laws that contradict one’s marketing materials will lead to some understandable questions about those “values”.
  - dilap 5y ago
    I think avianlyric is suggesting Apple didn't have a choice, and that US gov is compelling them to add the CSAM features. Which seems likely to me. † Really "CSAM", since there's no way to verify nor ensure it's only scanning for CSAM. What they are building is a prohibited content scanner, and what it will scan for is whatever governments would like it to scan for.
  - avianlyric 5y ago
    Well do you have a copy of Apple's marketing material from Russia saying that won't censor the app store if compelled to do so by the Russian government? It not reasonable to hold Apple to pledges they've made to western customers, when talking about a service provided to non-western customers. As much as we wish it wasn't true, the scope for providing privacy is substantially greater in the west than it is elsewhere.

jjulius 5y ago

Thank you for this. I had a number of HN users insinuate that I was wrong to warn that Apple could expand beyond CSAM scanning and begin scanning for other material. People seemed to take a very firm stance that no, that could never ever ever happen and I'm wrong to even suggest the possibility. This incident is more than enough for me to remain concerned that that will happen.

fsflover 5y ago
More arguments that Apple will go further than CSAM were presented by Snowden: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202.