7 ms·

No, he meant Apple's CSAM controversy. Apple wanted to scan files on your device, while Google scans stuff you upload to their cloud.

Spooky23 4y ago
Not really. It was a controversy created by a poorly written Apple press release that unveiled two distinct features, and subsequently ginned up by an even worse EFF blog post. CSAM scanning was all about iCloud, just like every other vendor, and the benefit was a roadmap to E2E storage. The more confusing thing was the explicit content notifications for parents for their minor children in family plans. So instead, just like everyone else, you almost certainly have CSAM scanning happening in iCloud directly. All of your content is just a subpoena away. Thanks EFF.
- vetinari 4y ago
  Running this kind of stuff is already leg in the door. Next they can decide to scan your device even, if you don't upload anything anywhere. For your safety, of course, you might be in a possession of an objectionable material, like photos of MAGA hats or other extremist paraphernalia. So this is a big red line. If you want to upload to iCloud, ok, scanning there is a fair game and you can always not upload to iCloud. But your device should be your device, respecting your privacy.
  - Spooky23 4y ago
    My minor child’s device is my device. As a parent, I may want to opt into a service on my managed, family device so I know my child’s fellow 9th grader girlfriend is sending pictures that may be a crime to possess, or vice versa. That is exactly what Apple did. Like I said, you’re conflating two things that are not the same, because you’ve been fed a steady diet of bad information stemming from Apples unusually poor communications and the EFFs inaccurate blog post.
endisneigh 4y ago
Apple only wanted to scan files on your device once you decide to upload it. In other words, if you don't ever actually upload anything nothing would ever be scanned.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  That upload that is the only way to load data onto your phone for many apps, that the phone is auto-opted into and that only Apple can offer? That one? The one that literally no competitor can replace since it uses special Apple entitlements?
  - endisneigh 4y ago
    I'm not sure what you're talking about? iOS has implemented interfaces to use things like Google Drive, One Drive, Dropbox, etc, baked into the file system.
    - vorpalhex 4y ago
      1. There is no filesystem (exposed), there are per-app sandboxes with the ability to move files from another sandbox 2. It only allows single file actions, no sync/offline cache/etc. Most apps don't meaningfully work well with this - there is no "sync these ten comics to this device at all times" Most apps still only use their local file sandbox.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        Any application that saves files using the standard file selector allows you to choose any installed storage solution.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Nobody is mad about cloud providers scanning for objectionable content. Everyone is mad because Apple is using the hardware you payed for to perform an operation you're paying them to provide. It's like paying for an API that gives you the weather, and all the endpoint returns is a system call for your phone's thermometer. It goes to show that Apple isn't afraid to undermine their own experience to implement adversarial software services. Combined with the way they "respect" the privacy of Chinese citizens, I don't think Apple actually cares about our privacy. It would seem that instead they're testing the waters for more radical changes[0], like using on-device machine learning to detect suicidal users or terrorists. And who's going to object when that happens, right? [0] Source: the past century of US political discourse.
anonuser123456 4y ago
Apple scans files on your device to compare against known CSAM content. Google scans your content for potential CSAM based on AI. One can imagine the false positive rate for the Google approach is likely higher.
- vetinari 4y ago
  Apple scans files on your device, using your resources (storage, compute, power). Google scans files on their devices, using their resources (storage, compute power). It is you who decided to upload files to Google's cloud. However, it is difficult to use your own device if you don't have privacy there.
  - anonuser123456 4y ago
    The feature Apple proposed would only apply to files you were uploading to iCloud. Turning off iCloud photos prevented scanning. The whole point of the Apple system was to enable end to end encryption so Apple couldn’t view your data on their servers. The only way they could get access is when a threshold of CSAM likely files were met. e.g the keys are sharded. With the Apple approach you have considerably more privacy.
    - vetinari 4y ago
      For now. The foot would be in door to enable it system-wide.
      - anonuser123456 4y ago
        Why would they care about getting a foot in a door that they have the keys to and is wide open? Modern SoCs have security domains that are invisible to the main CPUs. Apple can run just about anything it wants on the security coprocessor and users will be none the wiser. The American DOJ, FBI etc do not want end-to-end encryption and use ‘think of the children’ as an excuse. This gives Apple the plausible pushback to say ‘We have thought of the children…’

Spooky23 4y ago

Not really. It was a controversy created by a poorly written Apple press release that unveiled two distinct features, and subsequently ginned up by an even worse EFF blog post. CSAM scanning was all about iCloud, just like every other vendor, and the benefit was a roadmap to E2E storage. The more confusing thing was the explicit content notifications for parents for their minor children in family plans. So instead, just like everyone else, you almost certainly have CSAM scanning happening in iCloud directly. All of your content is just a subpoena away. Thanks EFF.

vetinari 4y ago
Running this kind of stuff is already leg in the door. Next they can decide to scan your device even, if you don't upload anything anywhere. For your safety, of course, you might be in a possession of an objectionable material, like photos of MAGA hats or other extremist paraphernalia. So this is a big red line. If you want to upload to iCloud, ok, scanning there is a fair game and you can always not upload to iCloud. But your device should be your device, respecting your privacy.
- Spooky23 4y ago
  My minor child’s device is my device. As a parent, I may want to opt into a service on my managed, family device so I know my child’s fellow 9th grader girlfriend is sending pictures that may be a crime to possess, or vice versa. That is exactly what Apple did. Like I said, you’re conflating two things that are not the same, because you’ve been fed a steady diet of bad information stemming from Apples unusually poor communications and the EFFs inaccurate blog post.

endisneigh 4y ago

Apple only wanted to scan files on your device once you decide to upload it. In other words, if you don't ever actually upload anything nothing would ever be scanned.

vorpalhex 4y ago
That upload that is the only way to load data onto your phone for many apps, that the phone is auto-opted into and that only Apple can offer? That one? The one that literally no competitor can replace since it uses special Apple entitlements?
- endisneigh 4y ago
  I'm not sure what you're talking about? iOS has implemented interfaces to use things like Google Drive, One Drive, Dropbox, etc, baked into the file system.
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    1. There is no filesystem (exposed), there are per-app sandboxes with the ability to move files from another sandbox 2. It only allows single file actions, no sync/offline cache/etc. Most apps don't meaningfully work well with this - there is no "sync these ten comics to this device at all times" Most apps still only use their local file sandbox.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Any application that saves files using the standard file selector allows you to choose any installed storage solution.
smoldesu 4y ago
Nobody is mad about cloud providers scanning for objectionable content. Everyone is mad because Apple is using the hardware you payed for to perform an operation you're paying them to provide. It's like paying for an API that gives you the weather, and all the endpoint returns is a system call for your phone's thermometer. It goes to show that Apple isn't afraid to undermine their own experience to implement adversarial software services. Combined with the way they "respect" the privacy of Chinese citizens, I don't think Apple actually cares about our privacy. It would seem that instead they're testing the waters for more radical changes[0], like using on-device machine learning to detect suicidal users or terrorists. And who's going to object when that happens, right? [0] Source: the past century of US political discourse.

anonuser123456 4y ago

Apple scans files on your device to compare against known CSAM content. Google scans your content for potential CSAM based on AI. One can imagine the false positive rate for the Google approach is likely higher.

vetinari 4y ago
Apple scans files on your device, using your resources (storage, compute, power). Google scans files on their devices, using their resources (storage, compute power). It is you who decided to upload files to Google's cloud. However, it is difficult to use your own device if you don't have privacy there.
- anonuser123456 4y ago
  The feature Apple proposed would only apply to files you were uploading to iCloud. Turning off iCloud photos prevented scanning. The whole point of the Apple system was to enable end to end encryption so Apple couldn’t view your data on their servers. The only way they could get access is when a threshold of CSAM likely files were met. e.g the keys are sharded. With the Apple approach you have considerably more privacy.
  - vetinari 4y ago
    For now. The foot would be in door to enable it system-wide.
    - anonuser123456 4y ago
      Why would they care about getting a foot in a door that they have the keys to and is wide open? Modern SoCs have security domains that are invisible to the main CPUs. Apple can run just about anything it wants on the security coprocessor and users will be none the wiser. The American DOJ, FBI etc do not want end-to-end encryption and use ‘think of the children’ as an excuse. This gives Apple the plausible pushback to say ‘We have thought of the children…’