5 ms·
> if you oppose this it would be wise to find other ways of solving the concerns people like Kutcher are raising. A technical solution that scans users' device
by falcolas 5y ago
> if you oppose this it would be wise to find other ways of solving the concerns people like Kutcher are raising.
A technical solution that scans users' devices for known CSAM does not exist in a way which preserves privacy while still being resistant to surveillance overreach. Apple's method was decent at preserving privacy, but it still requires absolute trust in the entity who provides the list of hashes to not put anything but CSAM there.
And what the EU is proposing goes beyond identifying known CSAM, but identifying new CSAM.
The solution is, as always, making investigations into child exploitation and sex trafficking a priority. It doesn't require the ability to rifle through everyone's devices to find the predators. It certainly hasn't up to this point - the bottleneck is and always has been making it a priority (funding, manpower, etc).
- xadhominemx 5y agoOk what if someone did sneak some non-CSAM? Some random person would get flagged, the photos would be manually reviewed, and then nothing bad would happen. Doesn’t seem like a very big deal.
- l33t2328 5y agoI disagree. The manual review process uses a downscaled/greyscaled version of the image, and there are known attacks on this type of preporcessing.
- xadhominemx 5y agoOk what if someone attacks the preprocessing. What bad thing happens next?
- falcolas 5y agoHere's a hypothetical: The FBI is responsible in the US for investigating interstate sex trafficking and CSAM (Note, the 'M' stands for "material" - not just photos). The FBI subsequently provides the CSAM hash list, and volunteers manpower for the manual reviews. Where does this go wrong? When the FBI expands the CSAM hash list to include "The Anarchists' Cookbook".
- xadhominemx 5y agoThey expand the hashlist to include images of the cover of “The Anarchists Cookbook?”
- whatshisface 5y agoThe EU law in the works doesn't only cover images.
- ImPostingOnHN 5y agohow would you know if they did?
- falcolas 5y agoOnly Apple's implementation was limited to images. There's nothing in the current or proposed laws that prevents searching other media. Otherwise, since an ebook is just a zipped HTML page with its resources, it leaves a huge loophole in the identification of CSAM.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago> and then nothing bad would happen. Source? If you have ever been a target of the police/legal/judicial system, there is rarely a case where the individual has nothing bad happen. The government actors’ impetus is to make sure they are not found at fault, not to ensure that the individual is actually guilty or innocent. At a minimum, the individual will lose many hours and go through a lot of stress. See any and all police misconduct cases in the US, as well as border patrol or really any other dealings with a government agent. The only protection is to be able to afford highly connected lawyers or be connected yourself.
- xadhominemx 5y agoPeople are investigated or are considered within the scope of an investigation all the time. We don’t learn/ care about it if there are no arrests. What specifically do you think could go wrong here?
- ImPostingOnHN 5y agoWhat could go wrong was explained above
- bakuninsbart 5y ago- AI is generally shit at not being biased, this is more of a meta point, but it is important to remember that all abuses and incosistencies will hit some people harder than other. - Some random government guy will look through my fotos. I do not want that. - There is no proper oversight for what is actually scanned, and on which paramaters. The gov could just "accidentally" also scan for other crimes or things it doesn't like. Democracy isn't set in stone, and this would be extremely useful infrastructure for a tyrant. - Banning encryption or requiring backdoors makes all of us less safe from third parties.
- xadhominemx 5y ago> that all abuses and incosistencies will hit some people harder than other How specifically could that play out in this instance? > The gov could just "accidentally" also scan for other crimes or things it doesn't like. Yes, if a government decides the rule of law does not matter bad things happen. That was true in the a analog days as well. > Banning encryption or requiring backdoors makes all of us less safe from third parties. This is not really a backdoor. Do you understand how the technology works?
- shakna 5y ago> How specifically could that play out in this instance? As AI is famously bad at matching against dark skinned individuals [0], all photos of black kids now flag as CSAM, whether or not any part of them is even dubious at all. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/24/21301759/facial-recognition-detroit-police-wrongful-arrest-robert-williams-artificial-intelligence https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/24/21301759/facial-recogniti...
- ImPostingOnHN 5y agoOr, for the same reason, law enforcement switches methodologies from proper, normal investigation to just scanning, since "its so easy!", but the software fails to recognize dark skinned children, and as a result all law enforcement efforts end up helping only lighter skinned victims
- throwawayboise 5y ago> it still requires absolute trust in the entity who provides the list of hashes to not put anything but CSAM there Yes but isn't that already the case? If a government, a three-letter-agency, or even a local detective want to fabricate a case against me for some reason, how difficult will that be to do in practice? Does this CSAM hash list really give them anything fundamentally new?
- falcolas 5y agoThe capability for a government agency to conduct a warrantless search of the mobile devices of all citizens (citizens being a narrow search target) for arbitrary data. This capability does not exist today, and I would argue it should not exist.