2 ms·

> even though it would've been more privacy-preserving than the in-cloud scanning that virtually all image hosts do today You can opt out of in-cloud scanning

• CharlesW 2y ago
  That would have still been true, since photos not destined for iCloud Photos were not scanned.
  • JoshTriplett 2y ago
    There is no fundamental property of the technology that ensures that. Once the capability exists, how long do you think that'd stay true?
    • CharlesW 2y ago
      It exists now, since the tech was repurposed for Apple’s Communication Safety (scanning for all nudity, not just CSAM): https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ https://www.apple.com/child-safety/ How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing surreptitious CSAM scanning? I have no idea. All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it.
      • palata 2y ago
        > All I know is that Apple is being sued for not doing it. Which doesn't make sense. > How do you validate that your OS, your apps, and other actors in your image/video processing and storage supply chains aren't doing [...] Because you don't know that your neighbour deals drugs does not make it legal.