5 ms·
Not to mention Google's been doing CSAM scans _in the cloud_ for years. Apple's approach was sensible and likely would've lead to end to end backup encryption..
by shmoe 5y ago
Not to mention Google's been doing CSAM scans _in the cloud_ for years. Apple's approach was sensible and likely would've lead to end to end backup encryption.. a shame the stupid, uninformed outcry about it has had this result.
- burner556 5y agoNo it’s not stupid. They are planning to scan your offline on-device files hashing against a secret list. That’s ridiculous and unacceptable.
- gjsman-1000 5y agoOn device files that were going to iCloud, no files that were not intended for iCloud, no scanning if you do not use iCloud, using a list stored on your device.
- burner556 5y ago“Only files intended for upload to iCloud” They pinky swear! What is the purpose of this infrastructure? Why not just scan on iCloud? This smells like rotten fish.
- shmoe 5y agoThey already do.. they wanted to move that device side so they could allow encrypted backups without them having the key, and thus unable to respond to law enforcement. That was the plan here..
- pseudalopex 5y agoApple didn't claim that was the plan at the time. No law stops them from encrypting backups anyway.
- shmoe 5y agoAnd that's how we get an FBI order to create a hacked version of iOS that allows unlimited passcode guesses in succession.
- pseudalopex 5y agoWhat law do you believe would let them do that? Why wouldn't it let them order Apple to scan everything on an iPhone? Or force it to back up without encryption?
- shmoe 5y ago.. you know it already happened once right?
- burner556 5y agoSad that they just can’t do that anyways. What happened to privacy? They need to justify things about preventing child porn to people for reasons? Fuck this government. They will use children and terrorists as an excuse to do whatever they want. Whenever you hear because Terrorism or because the children, watch out!
- shmoe 5y agosame "secret" list every other provider you've uploaded a file to uses.
- ohCh6zos 5y agoRight, it's also unacceptable there. A growing ability for governments to ask "Does any device contain "X" is a threat to privacy.
- matheusmoreira 5y agoIt's not sensible at all. They have the right to do whatever they want on their servers but scanning my computer crosses the line. It doesn't matter what it's for or when it happens. What matters is I don't want it to happen at all and their software disrespects my wishes. End-to-end encryption is meaningless if they see your data before it's actually encrypted. There's no point if the endpoints are compromised.
- shmoe 5y agoThen we get no encryption, or breakable encryption so that you can still be tapped in case you commit a crime - far better situation, yea? Apple resisted building a backdoored iOS for the FBI once.. will that work next time?
- matheusmoreira 5y agoI don't understand why you think it's up to the government whether or not we have encryption. The software is already widespread, there's nothing they can do about it. They either accept it or they increase their own tyranny by violating their own people's rights, actively underminding the security of their own citizens or passing insane laws such as "you're presumed guilty if you use encryption". I don't really care that they want to "tap into" communications in order to fight crime or whatever. As far as I'm concerned, they're not supposed to be able to do that under any circumstances and for any reason. Any attempt to do so is abuse.
- shmoe 5y agoWhen younger this view made far more sense... no encryption broken ever. There are plenty of legitimate scenarios, child sexual exploitation being one of them where I don't mind and exception or a workaround being applied to catch it where someone is stupid enough to get caught. Perhaps fatherhood has made me soft but I wouldn't let fancy ones and zeroes get in the way of kicking the ass of the person who exploited my child. It's not some slippery slope, it's the reality of humanity.
- xanaxagoras 5y agoYou're wrong to attribute our position to ignorance. Scanning local files on my computer is not sensible. I understood exactly how it worked and found it unacceptable. They'll never give you E2EE no matter how much privacy you cede. I'd be surprised if they're even allowed to - no doubt they're being threatened with punitive legislation if they do.
- shmoe 5y agoIt's exactly what they wanted to do. They wanted to be able to tell the FBI to go pound sand. This CSAM scanning was a step towards it.
- xanaxagoras 5y agoMaybe, maybe not. As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, what does "E2EE" really even mean when your device already finks you out for whatever the government tells Apple to look for in the black box you're running on their behalf? Either way, you can speculate on the intentions and future plans of a megacorp all you'd like. I got out from under their thumbs.
- shmoe 5y agoAny other company would've created that hacked version of their OS that allowed unlimited guesses at the passcode and not fought it in court... It's not like Apple's actual stance on privacy is without precedent.
- hansel_der 5y ago> Scanning local files on my computer is not sensible yet a lot of ppl even pay money for av-products that do just that and even upload offending files to google (virustotal).