9 ms·

‘Extreme’ Category A child sexual abuse online doubles in 2 years

retrochameleon 4y ago
Some quotes: > “People are now only one click away from Category A material. That is a public safety issue. This extreme material is no longer in the creepy corners of the internet. It’s in plain sight.” This sounds a little over-dramatic. I'm sure that people looking for CSAM know some places to look. But this almost makes it sound like anyone has a good chance of just accidentally coming upon it. > "Most importantly, companies need to ensure that features such as end-to-end encryption have the necessary safety features built in so that they do not blind themselves to abuse occurring on their platforms.” > Earlier this year, Marriott International, Inc. joined the IWF with the goal of blocking websites containing CSAM from guest internet access in its hotels. The collaboration is the first of its kind for the hotel industry. One of the Marriott’s stated aims was to address a “critical human rights issue for the industry”. > I urge you to join us as we fight to keep children safe - and this includes the tech companies and platforms who have a moral and legal duty to keep children safe, and must not allow End-to-End encryption stop us from identifying and removing this abuse. And here is the crux of the issue. They want to gut end-to-end encryption, prevent platforms from using it entirely, install "backdoors" in encryption, or otherwise "safety measures," whatever that could mean. I don't like CSAM being available on the internet as much as the next person, but I will NEVER support the amelioration of encryption, which would have far-reaching implications for privacy and free speech of everyone in the world who has nothing to do with CSAM.
- retrochameleon 4y ago
  Additionally, I tried to find out just who funds this foundation. From its Wikipedia page: The IWF is an incorporated charity, limited by guarantee, and largely funded by voluntary contributions from UK communications service providers, including ISPs, mobile phone operators, Internet trade associations, search engines, hardware manufacturers, and software providers. It also currently receives funding from the European Union by comprising one-third of the UK Safer Internet Centre. I wonder if ISPs and search engines would have some benefits to gain from having backdoors in end-to-end encryption. Not to mention the EU at large.
- waselighis 4y ago
  > This sounds a little over-dramatic. I'm sure that people looking for CSAM know some places to look. But this almost makes it sound like anyone has a good chance of just accidentally coming upon it. I've been on the internet for over 20 years and I don't think I've ever stumbled upon CSAM. But also I never browse websites like 4chan, and I don't really use the dark web for anything. The modern web is heavily centralized, and the major search engines and social media networks are very proactive in blocking this content. So for the average person, it's very unlikely they would just stumble upon it by accident.
waselighis 4y ago
If we're going to save E2EE (End to End Encryption), then we seriously need to propose real and effective alternative solutions that don't involve putting backdoors in encryption. If these problems continue to proliferate, society at large is not going to tolerate it, and western governments will have all the justification they need to backdoor encryption. Once the government/law enforcement has backdoors in encryption, it's game over at that point, we'll never be able to undo any such legislation. Anybody who opposes will likely be labeled as potential criminals to silence their opposition. The first most obvious step is to ensure it's easy to report illegal activity, and make it super obvious how to do so, especially for children and teens. The party receiving the messages should be able to voluntarily report them for potentially illegal content or illegal activity. Part of me might be okay with client side scanning THAT DOES NOT REPORT ANYTHING AUTOMATICALLY! The option to report content should be my choice and completely voluntary. By all means warn/alert me, but do NOT upload any of my encrypted messages without my consent. I don't care how confident the client side scanning may be, because the AI models used for scanning will produce countless false positives. When any message could be reported virtually at random, this makes E2EE effectively meaningless. Again, we seriously need to find alternate solutions to these problems and soon, because our fundamental rights to privacy and security have never been at greater risk than they are today.
- teddyh 4y ago
  > If these problems continue to proliferate, society at large is not going to tolerate it You mean if society is convinced that these problems continue to proliferate. And that’s the problem. Whether or not these specific problems actually exist and are widespread enough, they can always find something else to pretend to be upset about, and yell to reporters, who love to report on a good crisis. The public is then convinced that some problem or other is serious enough to bend the democratic and free speech principles “just a little, for this special case”, and then on to the next time, where it will all repeat again. Note that this has nothing to do with CSAM specifically, it’s just used as the latest scary thing, regardless if it is true or not. This has been called the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse”¹, but the general phenomenon is much older than that; witch trials have always existed in one form or another, whether they are called “witches” or not. My point is that solving the CSAM problem will change absolutely nothing to save E2EE. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...
belorn 4y ago
For how often the article talks about end-to-end encryption, and the chat control regulation looming around the corner, I have a hard time trust their statistics that child sexual abuse "category A" has doubled in the last 2 years. Most cases of child sexual abuse is found either by health care professionals, people working in education, or by common police work. If the rate has doubled the last 2 years than society should react sensible by increasing funding to those institutions and departments that are responsible for catching that kind of criminals. Are we? If not, why? To provide some data points here that I do trust, the Swedish government has a government department responsible for researching and collecting data around crime. They also publish yearly statistics with graphs. There has been a 10% increase since last year of cases involving sexual assault where the victim is in the age 0-15, and decreased by 7% for those of age 15-18. Those numbers seems a bit more realistic, and the appropriate response would still be to increase funding to those institutions and departments that are responsible for catching that kind of criminals.

Some quotes: > “People are now only one click away from Category A material. That is a public safety issue. This extreme material is no longer in the creepy corners of the internet. It’s in plain sight.” This sounds a little over-dramatic. I'm sure that people looking for CSAM know some places to look. But this almost makes it sound like anyone has a good chance of just accidentally coming upon it. > "Most importantly, companies need to ensure that features such as end-to-end encryption have the necessary safety features built in so that they do not blind themselves to abuse occurring on their platforms.” > Earlier this year, Marriott International, Inc. joined the IWF with the goal of blocking websites containing CSAM from guest internet access in its hotels. The collaboration is the first of its kind for the hotel industry. One of the Marriott’s stated aims was to address a “critical human rights issue for the industry”. > I urge you to join us as we fight to keep children safe - and this includes the tech companies and platforms who have a moral and legal duty to keep children safe, and must not allow End-to-End encryption stop us from identifying and removing this abuse. And here is the crux of the issue. They want to gut end-to-end encryption, prevent platforms from using it entirely, install "backdoors" in encryption, or otherwise "safety measures," whatever that could mean. I don't like CSAM being available on the internet as much as the next person, but I will NEVER support the amelioration of encryption, which would have far-reaching implications for privacy and free speech of everyone in the world who has nothing to do with CSAM.

retrochameleon 4y ago
Additionally, I tried to find out just who funds this foundation. From its Wikipedia page: The IWF is an incorporated charity, limited by guarantee, and largely funded by voluntary contributions from UK communications service providers, including ISPs, mobile phone operators, Internet trade associations, search engines, hardware manufacturers, and software providers. It also currently receives funding from the European Union by comprising one-third of the UK Safer Internet Centre. I wonder if ISPs and search engines would have some benefits to gain from having backdoors in end-to-end encryption. Not to mention the EU at large.
waselighis 4y ago
> This sounds a little over-dramatic. I'm sure that people looking for CSAM know some places to look. But this almost makes it sound like anyone has a good chance of just accidentally coming upon it. I've been on the internet for over 20 years and I don't think I've ever stumbled upon CSAM. But also I never browse websites like 4chan, and I don't really use the dark web for anything. The modern web is heavily centralized, and the major search engines and social media networks are very proactive in blocking this content. So for the average person, it's very unlikely they would just stumble upon it by accident.

waselighis 4y ago

If we're going to save E2EE (End to End Encryption), then we seriously need to propose real and effective alternative solutions that don't involve putting backdoors in encryption. If these problems continue to proliferate, society at large is not going to tolerate it, and western governments will have all the justification they need to backdoor encryption. Once the government/law enforcement has backdoors in encryption, it's game over at that point, we'll never be able to undo any such legislation. Anybody who opposes will likely be labeled as potential criminals to silence their opposition. The first most obvious step is to ensure it's easy to report illegal activity, and make it super obvious how to do so, especially for children and teens. The party receiving the messages should be able to voluntarily report them for potentially illegal content or illegal activity. Part of me might be okay with client side scanning THAT DOES NOT REPORT ANYTHING AUTOMATICALLY! The option to report content should be my choice and completely voluntary. By all means warn/alert me, but do NOT upload any of my encrypted messages without my consent. I don't care how confident the client side scanning may be, because the AI models used for scanning will produce countless false positives. When any message could be reported virtually at random, this makes E2EE effectively meaningless. Again, we seriously need to find alternate solutions to these problems and soon, because our fundamental rights to privacy and security have never been at greater risk than they are today.

teddyh 4y ago
> If these problems continue to proliferate, society at large is not going to tolerate it You mean if society is convinced that these problems continue to proliferate. And that’s the problem. Whether or not these specific problems actually exist and are widespread enough, they can always find something else to pretend to be upset about, and yell to reporters, who love to report on a good crisis. The public is then convinced that some problem or other is serious enough to bend the democratic and free speech principles “just a little, for this special case”, and then on to the next time, where it will all repeat again. Note that this has nothing to do with CSAM specifically, it’s just used as the latest scary thing, regardless if it is true or not. This has been called the “Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse”¹, but the general phenomenon is much older than that; witch trials have always existed in one form or another, whether they are called “witches” or not. My point is that solving the CSAM problem will change absolutely nothing to save E2EE. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

belorn 4y ago

For how often the article talks about end-to-end encryption, and the chat control regulation looming around the corner, I have a hard time trust their statistics that child sexual abuse "category A" has doubled in the last 2 years. Most cases of child sexual abuse is found either by health care professionals, people working in education, or by common police work. If the rate has doubled the last 2 years than society should react sensible by increasing funding to those institutions and departments that are responsible for catching that kind of criminals. Are we? If not, why? To provide some data points here that I do trust, the Swedish government has a government department responsible for researching and collecting data around crime. They also publish yearly statistics with graphs. There has been a 10% increase since last year of cases involving sexual assault where the victim is in the age 0-15, and decreased by 7% for those of age 15-18. Those numbers seems a bit more realistic, and the appropriate response would still be to increase funding to those institutions and departments that are responsible for catching that kind of criminals.