3 ms·

>>It was a really interesting scheme that Apple clearly put a huge amount of thought into in order to maximise privacy. No. They appeared to put in this effort

>>It was a really interesting scheme that Apple clearly put a huge amount of thought into in order to maximise privacy. No. They appeared to put in this effort, but at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device for any reason, saying "oh it's only for files uploaded to icloud" was obviously the first step. And then of course the fact that if anything was deemed innapropriate it would have been submitted to their own verification centre where someone would actually physically look at your pictures and then forward them to law enforcement, without you being notified that this has happened in any way - that doesn't sound like maximising privacy to me. >>but I wouldn’t be opposed to the scheme Apple wanted to implement. I would. It was a horrendous implementation and any on-device scanning should always be opposed to the maximum extent that you can bare.

zimpenfish 3y ago
> at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device They could already be doing this though, right? Unless some trustworthy external auditor has gone through the iOS/macOS/iPadOS source and audited that they don't (good luck with that.)
- gambiting 3y ago
  Of course - but Apple isn't going to produce a custom iOS build to find pictures of dissidents for a dictator(at least I find that unlikely), but if it's a system that everyone knows exists but verifies your pictures against some closed, uninspectable and constantly updated database of hashes......what's the harm of sneaking few more hashes in, right?
JimDabell 3y ago
> No. They appeared to put in this effort To be clear – you are saying this was an easy thing for Apple to construct? > but at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device for any reason This is factually untrue and also not in contrast to the amount of effort they put in. > And then of course the fact that if anything was deemed innapropriate it would have been submitted to their own verification centre where someone would actually physically look at your pictures and then forward them to law enforcement This is also factually incorrect. Did you read the technical documentation Apple published?
- gambiting 3y ago
  >>To be clear – you are saying this was an easy thing for Apple to construct? No. >>This is factually untrue and also not in contrast to the amount of effort they put in. How so? I fail to see how this system has anything that would prevent it from being used to scan any file on the device? Sure their design is only for pictures, but why would it be limited to them? >>This is also factually incorrect. It's not, that is exactly what their technical paper says. >> Did you read the technical documentation Apple published? I did, multiple times, I've been having these arguments for a long time now.
photonerd 3y ago
> at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device for any reason This kind of comment is exactly why they said lots of people didn’t understand the system. Because it’s utterly untrue & appears to not display ANY understanding of the underlying system at all
- gambiting 3y ago
  Please explain how it's not true. I understand the system and its design pretty well and I literally don't understand how you can't see the risk of this happening here.
  - photonerd 3y ago
    If you understood the system you’d understand how that makes as much sense as saying “the iPhone has cameras that means they will be able to see everything you’re doing!” It’s not true, it’s not how that works, it’s not how any of it works. It’s also something that could ONLY be true of they changed how everything worked.
    - gambiting 3y ago
      >>If you understood the system you’d understand how that makes as much sense I don't know why you keep implying I don't understand how the system works - I do. And I literally don't see how you can take your position and believe in it. The system as proposed would generate a special "similarity" hash for pictures that are about to be uploaded to icloud - then those hashes would be compared against an uninspectable database of hashes provided by apple in collaboration with law enforcement agencies. Literally all that would need to change here is that this system would need to scan all files not just pictures(trivial) and either all the time or on request instead of on upload to icloud(trivial). And of course it's silly to believe nation states wouldn't force Apple to add their own hashes of anything they want into the database - after all there is no oversight process over this. This isn't a major change to how the whole system works, it's a minor change and one that definitely would be made with time "because think of the children/terrorists/etc" You really don't see it as an absolultely inevitable consequence of this system being implemented and in fact just existing at all? If no, then you have more trust in Apple than I do.

zimpenfish 3y ago

> at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device They could already be doing this though, right? Unless some trustworthy external auditor has gone through the iOS/macOS/iPadOS source and audited that they don't (good luck with that.)

gambiting 3y ago
Of course - but Apple isn't going to produce a custom iOS build to find pictures of dissidents for a dictator(at least I find that unlikely), but if it's a system that everyone knows exists but verifies your pictures against some closed, uninspectable and constantly updated database of hashes......what's the harm of sneaking few more hashes in, right?

JimDabell 3y ago

> No. They appeared to put in this effort To be clear – you are saying this was an easy thing for Apple to construct? > but at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device for any reason This is factually untrue and also not in contrast to the amount of effort they put in. > And then of course the fact that if anything was deemed innapropriate it would have been submitted to their own verification centre where someone would actually physically look at your pictures and then forward them to law enforcement This is also factually incorrect. Did you read the technical documentation Apple published?

gambiting 3y ago
>>To be clear – you are saying this was an easy thing for Apple to construct? No. >>This is factually untrue and also not in contrast to the amount of effort they put in. How so? I fail to see how this system has anything that would prevent it from being used to scan any file on the device? Sure their design is only for pictures, but why would it be limited to them? >>This is also factually incorrect. It's not, that is exactly what their technical paper says. >> Did you read the technical documentation Apple published? I did, multiple times, I've been having these arguments for a long time now.

photonerd 3y ago

> at the end of the day they built a system which could be used for scanning any file on your device for any reason This kind of comment is exactly why they said lots of people didn’t understand the system. Because it’s utterly untrue & appears to not display ANY understanding of the underlying system at all

gambiting 3y ago
Please explain how it's not true. I understand the system and its design pretty well and I literally don't understand how you can't see the risk of this happening here.
- photonerd 3y ago
  If you understood the system you’d understand how that makes as much sense as saying “the iPhone has cameras that means they will be able to see everything you’re doing!” It’s not true, it’s not how that works, it’s not how any of it works. It’s also something that could ONLY be true of they changed how everything worked.
  - gambiting 3y ago
    >>If you understood the system you’d understand how that makes as much sense I don't know why you keep implying I don't understand how the system works - I do. And I literally don't see how you can take your position and believe in it. The system as proposed would generate a special "similarity" hash for pictures that are about to be uploaded to icloud - then those hashes would be compared against an uninspectable database of hashes provided by apple in collaboration with law enforcement agencies. Literally all that would need to change here is that this system would need to scan all files not just pictures(trivial) and either all the time or on request instead of on upload to icloud(trivial). And of course it's silly to believe nation states wouldn't force Apple to add their own hashes of anything they want into the database - after all there is no oversight process over this. This isn't a major change to how the whole system works, it's a minor change and one that definitely would be made with time "because think of the children/terrorists/etc" You really don't see it as an absolultely inevitable consequence of this system being implemented and in fact just existing at all? If no, then you have more trust in Apple than I do.