3 ms·
That wasn't what Apple was proposing though, they were quite clear [1] that it would be a human making the call to notify authorities, and only after a scoring
by spacedcowboy 4y ago
That wasn't what Apple was proposing though, they were quite clear [1] that it would be a human making the call to notify authorities, and only after a scoring algorithm had passed a threshold set pretty high (expected to be a trillion-to-one against false positives).
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20211210163051/https:/www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://web.archive.org/web/20211210163051/https:/www.apple....
- AmericanChopper 4y agoYes, which isn’t a massive privacy concern and is of course not also susceptible false positives. Oh, wait a minute, it is… https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveillance-toddler-photo.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveil... Anytime this feature does anything, in every case, it will be acting against the interests of the user. There is no requirement, legal or otherwise, to implement this feature in order to enable E2EE for a cloud storage service. To act as if there is is simple gaslighting.
- spacedcowboy 4y agoshrug Every, and I mean every cloud provider is currently scanning every image uploaded to it. If every single provider is doing that, then I'm going to think there's a good reason for that, and maybe (just maybe) there's something behind it. Some reason for it. But I'm not here to change your mind - believe what you wish.
- AmericanChopper 4y agoThe claim that I was replying to was that the reaction to CSAM scanning was the reason Apple didn’t implement additional E2EE for iCloud storage. When in fact CSAM scanning was neither a legal nor technical requirement for expanding E2EE in iCloud. Your question as to why so many companies gravitate towards the same anti-user patterns is both unrelated and pointless.