11 ms·

Anything that includes client side scanning is a slippery slope to fully controlling your device. Will it be illegal to somehow disable the client side scanning

• slackdog 4y ago
  > Will it be illegal to somehow disable the client side scanning? If so then how long until you are breaking the law when you turn off the government scanner And once they've normalized "your computer will spy and inform on you", is there any reason to think that won't expand to things which aren't colloquially "computers" but in fact are now computers? What about "smart houses"? All your IoT toys are computers. Once phones, laptops and PCs as mandatory reporters has been normalized, is there any reason to think all the other microphones and cameras already in people's houses won't become mandatory reporters too? If they make it illegal to disable client-side scanning on computers, might they also make it illegal to remove the crime-detecting cameras in your own home? Modern cars already narc on people, logging and uploading GPS traces that can be fed into police dragnets, just like phones. Cops can ask for a log of who's been inside a 'geofence' and where does that data come from? Phones and cars reporting on their owners, generally without their owners knowing anything about it. The 'slippery slope' isn't actually a fallacy if you have enough datapoints to legitimately draw a trend line. And I think we certainly do.
  • trompetenaccoun 4y ago
    My friend, these are dangerous thoughts! Once we have our wifi-enabled brain interfaces you will get punished for thinking this. Please train yourself to forget about it now before you get in trouble.
    • connicpu 4y ago
      But will we be punished for thinking it? Or will the chip simply cut off such trains of thought in the first place? :) "Revolutionary new brain implant improves mental health by suppressing damaging* trains of thought"
      • akomtu 4y ago
        The former, in a couple centuries. Centralized monitoring of common thoughts will be a solved problem, and the means to circumvent it won't be known by many. This ideal oppression machine will last for a few centuries.
      • snerbles 4y ago
        There have already been experiments in altering personal biases and beliefs through transcranial magnetic stimulation [0][1]. Direct electrical stimulation will eventually permit a greater degree of control. > We presented participants with a reminder of death and a critique of their in-group ostensibly written by a member of an out-group, then experimentally decreased both avowed belief in God and out-group derogation by downregulating pMFC activity via transcranial magnetic stimulation. The results provide the first evidence that group prejudice and religious belief are susceptible to targeted neuromodulation, and point to a shared cognitive mechanism underlying concrete and abstract decision processes. [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26341901/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26341901/ [1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151014084955.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151014084955.h...
      • deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  • slickrick216 4y ago
    Show us E-papers please
  • JW_00000 4y ago
    Can you provide a source for that last paragraph (the cars uploading GPS traces and cops asking for logs)? I'm interested in knowing more, e.g. which country this happens in, are there any checks and balances, is this constitutional?
    • slackdog 4y ago
      In America: Cars logging their location history and police getting that data: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/04/01/these-companies-track-millions-of-cars-immigration-and-border-police-have-been-grabbing-their-data/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/04/01/these... Geofenced dragnets: https://harvardlawreview.org/2021/05/geofence-warrants-and-the-fourth-amendment/ https://harvardlawreview.org/2021/05/geofence-warrants-and-t...
      • est31 4y ago
        Not giving owners (or their lawyers) access to data on what the Autopilot thought: https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2020/02/26/car-owners-rights-data-access-black-box/4873365002/ https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2020/02/26/c...
    • RedComet 4y ago
      Look into OnStar.
  • miohtama 4y ago
    In Orwell's 1984, the TV was watching you.
    • deafpolygon 4y ago
      Worse than that.. the billboards were watching you.
      • Doxin 4y ago
        I mean go look at modern digital billboards, a bunch of 'em have cameras built in.
        • deafpolygon 4y ago
          yeah, it's a bit creepy how on the nose 1984 was. maybe Orwell was a time-traveler.
          • Doxin 4y ago
            I remember talking to my dad about 1984 -- the book not the year -- and being somewhat surprised he didn't find it to be either prescient or honestly much of an interesting book in any case. While when I read it it definitely filled me with a sense of dread. I suppose "in his day" much of the predictions had not yet come true, and he didn't quite grasp how now they most definitely have.
  • im3w1l 4y ago
    > The Jews will hide behind the stones and the trees, and the stones and the trees will say: Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him. Eerie, isn't it?
• zirgs 4y ago
  Also how do they prevent this from being exploited by hackers? If there's a backdoor it's naive to think that only the "good guys" will use it. Also what if some hackers put something on my phone to intentionally trigger this in order to blackmail me or ruin my reputation?
  • legrande 4y ago
    > If there's a backdoor it's naive to think that only the "good guys" will use it. This is the thinking behind NSA's 'Nobody But Us' saying. If you hoard 0day, assume someone else will discover it given enough time. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOBUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOBUS
    • zirgs 4y ago
      Except in this case everybody knows that there's a backdoor that can be exploited.
  • hulitu 4y ago
    > If there's a backdoor it's naive to think that only the "good guys" will use it. Yet we have learned nothing from KGB, STASI, CIA etc. > Also what if some hackers put something on my phone to intentionally trigger this "We just found 5 gramms of Mary jane in your pocket". Religion will come back. "Repent or god will punish you" /s
• hasseldahoff 4y ago
  > Is the problem that people can send encrypted things back and forth to each other? I think this is the case, except it’s a feature not a bug. The predictable characters will shoehorn in the concern angle[1]. [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocal...
• matthewdgreen 4y ago
  The only client-side scanning proposal we’ve ever seen (Apple and NCMEC’s 2021 photo scanning proposal) didn’t even address encrypted messaging. It worked on private photo libraries on your phone. I think it’s very important to reiterate that the targets here aren’t communications between criminals: it’s your private data.
  • hot_gril 4y ago
    Not the only one. At the same time, they announced a separate scanner for incoming inappropriate photos over iMessage as a parental control feature. Unlike the photo library scanner, this one actually got released. https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/
    • matthewdgreen 4y ago
      That feature did not report users to the police. It did notify parents automatically, however, if you were a child in a family account. After some feedback from child protection advocates they removed the mandatory parental notification and made it a button that the child has to press.
      • hot_gril 4y ago
        The police report was the wackiest part of the other feature, yeah.
  • jodrellblank 4y ago
    It would scan photos you were uploading to iCloud, not private photo libraries on your phone. I'm sure you'll agree it's important to correct such a misunderstanding as one of those is a lot more invasive than the other.
    • hot_gril 4y ago
      Yeah, important to mention that. Still, I don't want my phone to even be capable of doing that, nor do I see the reason behind it when iCloud could just do the scanning itself. That's one big step closer to the described full-private scanning (and just a flag flip away).
• hot_gril 4y ago
  > Today it’s saving the children, tomorrow it’s basically any problem This is how most rights get taken away, not just encryption. Also, we're talking about countries that already have pretty restricted speech. Encryption has to consistently remain popular to survive there, and there are plenty of ways to undermine that.
  • ultrarunner 4y ago
    And it's completely obvious bullshit. Consider any more salient issue affecting children: the leading cause of death for children under 18 is car crashes. The response to this large and growing problem is to a) blame the victims (they shouldn't have been in the road / they should have walked a mile out of their way to return to the spot 100 feet across a road / they weren't wearing construction vests & waving flags / walking to school isn't allowed in the first place) or to wave it away as the cost of doing business. Were there a shred of consistency in actually advocating for children's quality of life, I could forgive those who are duped by these underhanded tactics. As it stands, there's no actual concerted "save the children" bandwagon that we're being invited to hop on to.
    • epicureanideal 4y ago
      > As it stands, there's no actual concerted "save the children" bandwagon that we're being invited to hop on to. Maybe one should be created, with a prioritized list of issues, and loudly inform people that if issues at the bottom are being prioritized the proponents may have other motives than the ones they claim.
      • eastbound 4y ago
        Impossible. If you rank avoidable deaths by quantity, men arrive in all the top 10 categories, so I’m pretty sure no-one would want to make this list anyway.
        • hanselot 4y ago
          Don't say that out loud. Clearly nobody is suggesting that on average men flock towards more dangerous higher paying professions which until recently also meant higher wages. Wouldn't want people to make the connection between risk and reward as a factor in economics.
• bboygravity 4y ago
  > Requiring that companies put snooping software on their device is basically the thought police. There is already snooping software on most company devices: Microsoft software and Google software and the Western internet. It's already snooping on everybody for the government (through at the very least NSA). It already makes sure the traffic is (hopefully/maybe) only encrypted for everybody else. This goes for the EU as well. Most Western countries legalized and extended what Snowden revealed about government surveillance. It's already being used in a dragnet surveillance thought police type of way for decades. At least no doubt in my mind. Call me paranoid, don't care.
  • junipertea 4y ago
    I definitely agree surveillance is happening and I don't mean to do a whataboutism, but why such emphasis on Western internet? Are you implying this does not happen elsewhere? If we take a counterpoint to West, India and China both have significant surveillance of their citizen and they account for the other third of the world population. Let's just agree it's a problem everywhere?
    • CyanBird 4y ago
      > Let's just agree it's a problem everywhere? Let's just not, because the ones carrying the baton of "liberty" are the ones that ought be measured by that same stick China or other countries do not fall on the hypocrisy of saying that your info won't be part of the dragnet, this is not the case with said western govs which then proceed to decry the evil non-western countries for doing the exact same thing and expecting their populations to somehow do something about it¿? ¿? ¿ It is indeed nauseating
    • peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > Let's just agree it's a problem everywhere? In some places they say you are free and have rights, but you don't. In other places you know you don't have certain rights and act accordingly, because people are not stupid, if they know there's a potential danger ahead, they become more cautious (or they carefully comply, because there are no alternatives). I would say the first group of counties is more dangerous, because it gives people a false sense of security, lowering their natural defenses, while corporations profit from knowing everything about them, things they said they should never have had access to in the first place, because you have rights, right?
• dunham 4y ago
  Also a potential security issue. Many client side virus scanners have accidentally introduced remotely exploitable security holes.