4 ms·
One common argument was that bad state actors would get non-CSAM, but still "undesirable" (as defined by the state), material into the database and use it to ta
by tiltowait 3y ago
One common argument was that bad state actors would get non-CSAM, but still "undesirable" (as defined by the state), material into the database and use it to target dissidents, badthink, etc.
(Personally, I think this was an overblown risk, since the plan was for the images to first be reviewed by Apple before being sent to the authorities. Presumably if an Apple employee/contractor saw a photo of, say, Tank Man, they wouldn't pass it on. But it's reasonable to be concerned.)
- detourdog 3y agoI agree. That was just an argument using Apple's CSAM implementation as a vector for a bad state actor. The same misuse could be facilitate any number of ways. I have come to the conclusion that part of corporate combat involves apparent grassroots outrage. If a system without a wide open backdoor is proven effective it becomes more difficult to argue for a bigger backdoor.