8 ms·
Google's Unannounced Update Scans All Your Photos
- atum47 2y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40967371 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40967371
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- interloxia 2y agoNot much discussion on hn from the few threads that come up in the search. But I want to highlight rini17 which links to a post from GrapheneOS that in turn links to the Google blog from Oct 2024. My 2c is that this style of on device monitoring to warn users/children is an expected evolution of parental content monitoring tools for the llm era. Graphine is right. As open source it would be much better. Privacy and trust concerns would be easier to check and give the opportunity to make tools that empower parents and children to decide how they should moderate content on their devices. Perhaps some communities are very worried about nudity where others are more concerned about hate speech. Having the choice on what to detect and how, or if, to act would be helpful. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43203303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43203303 https://security.googleblog.com/2024/10/5-new-protections-on-google-messages.html https://security.googleblog.com/2024/10/5-new-protections-on...
- willvarfar 2y agofor algorithmic nudity detection, would open source / open weights actually make it easier for an adversary to make saleable tools to bypass?
- soulofmischief 2y agoCurrently, no. You only need the ability to run inference on a given sample.
- Freak_NL 2y agoIs there a use case for that? If it is about bypassing parental restrictions or just blurring images because the user requests that feature, the pool of potential buyers seems small and likely too risky to engage.
- hannasanarion 2y agoIt's also about blocking spam. Don't know why that's buried in this particular article, but many sources have pointed to that as one of the primary use cases for the new system tool.
- pbhjpbhj 2y agoGoogle are producing a tool to block adverts (spam)? Only ones that haven't paid them, presumably.
- terminalbraid 2y agohttps://archive.is/4VOdk https://archive.is/4VOdk
- neilv 2y ago> Lessons learnt for both Apple and Google in recent weeks then. If you want to turn our phones into AI-fueled machines, then let us know what you’re doing before you do it, and give us the opportunity to say yes or no. Otherwise it fuels fear of the unknown. And if AI is to bed down on our smartphones with access to all our apps and data, then it needs to establish high trust bars and stick to them rigidly. Is that really a lesson learnt? Didn't Google already know what the reaction would be, before they consciously (given it's a significant launch) decided to do it that way? Why would they care about a little blogger noise?
- amelius 2y agoLesson learnt, way back: it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission.
- jajko 2y agoForgiveness? Thats a wrong term here and inapplicable. Loss of trust is the topic, you don't simply ask for forgiveness if you mess up, you work your ass off with building that trust again over lengthy period of time. And even then its not 100% back, trust is a finicky thing. This leads to loss of revenue, maybe small maybe not. Ie if google is paired with some mentality and/or actions of current US government, US phones and all internet-enabled electronic products everywhere outside of US should be viewed with same scrutiny Huawei was treated previously, with very similar actions.
- mahirsaid 2y agofacebook 2000's
- fazeirony 2y agoi can't wait for the "there's been confusion about what we've done" message to come out. cuz its always us, right? the customer is always wrong in this era of techno-feudalism.
- dingnuts 2y ago
- dcdevito 2y ago[dead]
- Gasp0de 2y agoI think the author of the article got a few things wrong. As far as I understood, SafetyCore is not "scanning all your photos". It is an API that apps on your phone CAN use to LOCALLY detect nudity and other potentially inappropriate things in photos.
- theshrike79 2y agoJust like the Apple system COULD LOCALLY detect CSAM on your phone. And it was the Worst Thing Ever according to hackernews and the internet at large. Now when Google does it, it's just fine and dandy.
- gumby271 2y agoI'm pretty sure what Apple proposed was an offline system for scanning, but any matches would be submitted to them. This is just the offline parts, and apps can choose to use it to detect nudity or other NSFW images. There's no scanning going on at all actually.
- JimDabell 2y agoThis is not correct. This is how most people assumed the Apple proposal worked, but it actually worked in a very different way. The device never knew if an image matched. Matches could only be determined via the combination of a receipt calculated on the device, plus information on the server, plus meeting a threshold of many matches. It was not offline scanning and uploading matches.
- fsflover 2y agoDoes it matter? A tiny and invisible update would be able to change that in no time and with no possibility for a user to opt out.
- JimDabell 2y agoThis is true of literally any software with auto updates. You’re criticising them for something they did not do, did not intend to do, and designed a system that worked in an entirely different way… just because they could do it differently to what they actually proposed doing. If they wanted to do it that other way, they could have just done it that other way in the first place and saved themselves a lot of effort.
- Freak_NL 2y ago> Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the browser console for more information). I got this after the Forbes tab had sat open for a few minutes. Gotta love the modern web. I hate how modern society all but requires a smartphone running either Android or IOS. I am very happy that something like GrapheneOS (mentioned in the article as well) exists, and allows me to have a smartphone without fully joining either cult and trusting everything those megacorps push. I hate that this is such a vulnerable position to be in.
- account42 2y agoThe worst part is that the site renders more or less fine (at least there is text) and then suddenly everything gets erased to show that error.
- fsflover 2y agoGrapheneOS still relies on Google hardware and forces you to give your money to Google. Only GNU/Linux phones offer true independence. The article opens with no problems on my Librem 5 running desktop Firefox with NoScript.
- Freak_NL 2y agoSure it does. But at the same time GrapheneOS is one of the very options where you can run a modern Android smartphone with precautions, and use the Play Store only for selected apps (banking, government auth, and in the Netherlands, WhatsApp (unfortunately)), and just use F-Droid for everything else. I don't mind paying Google for a piece of hardware quite as much as I do running their OS without anyone looking out for the user's privacy. The hardware transaction is much more straightforward and transparent (although by no means perfect). Before this I used a Ubuntu Phone, and that was fine, but like a dumbphone, you can't use any 'official app store sanctioned' apps with it, which has become really cumbersome these past few years. If using PureOS means I can't install banking apps and government auth apps, then that is a non-starter. I wish that wasn't the case, but it is. (The article threw this error on my Linux desktop in Firefox by the way.)
- theandrewbailey 2y agoThis makes me glad that when I reflashed my phone a few weeks ago, I left out Google Play.
- tetromino_ 2y agoIn other words, you're in the 50% of the population who don't get unsolicited d*ck photos sent to them. But do consider that the other 50% may have significantly different preferences on this matter, and that those preferences may drive tech company product decisions.
- Y_Y 2y agoWhat population are you talking about that a full half of them get sent {deck,dick,dock,duck,dyck} photos?
- theandrewbailey 2y agoI don't follow your logic. How would one's membership in a big tech ecosystem determine whether they get unsolicited pics? Or whether they feel they can jump out of those ecosystems? > But do consider that the other 50% may have significantly different preferences on this matter Or am I reading it the wrong way? 50% of people want to get those pics? That's either news to me, or I run in different circles than you do. Either way, I don't feel that I'm evangelizing about it, I'm not telling everyone that they should do what I'm doing. I'm merely telling my experiences and what I've done.
- mos_basik 2y ago@tetromino_ is expressing a prior that women are sent dick pics more frequently than men. From that they infer that women might actually like a feature that blurs out dicks automatically (at least, more than men would). From that they infer that your expressed dislike of that feature means it's likely you're a man. From that they infer that you're not used to thinking like a woman, and encourage you to try doing that to see if you think it makes Google's actions make more sense. (now, the real question - did I get "whooosh"ed, or did you?) EDIT: To be honest, I don't particularly like the sarcasm of @tetromino_'s comment and I don't think your original comment deserved a response like that. But seeing two responses apparently totally miss @tetromino_'s point was too much for me to ignore.
- gumby271 2y agoI've seen this article circulating other sites, and it's kind of crazy to compare that headline and the content to the reality of what's happening here. In fact, reading the article now, I see it's continuously been edited to add quotes pulled from Reddit, so I have to assume the goal here was largely just rage/engagement bait. The reality is that it's an app that offer's some on device models to detect nsfw content. Apps can choose to use those models instead of having to implement it themselves and I think that's kind of it. There's no scanning, there's no uploading, the article is even pulling quotes from a random forum that claims it's listening to your microphone and reading your contacts. The gap between what's written and reality is really ridiculous. There's a discussion to be had around Google's ability to update software on our phones without our control, absolutely. But that's not what this article is doing, and wont lead the majority to that topic. This article is like reading a conspiracy website, it's a flashy headline with a kernel of truth, but just leads to dangerous behavior, like all the people installing stub apks from GitHub to keep this from installing.
- sunaookami 2y agoForbes is blogspam: https://larslofgren.com/forbes-marketplace/ https://larslofgren.com/forbes-marketplace/
- joecool1029 2y agoThanks, this is how I understand them as well for years now. I flagged this submission not because we shouldn't be critical and having a discussion about whatever this tool does but I would rather see a security professional disassembling and reverse engineering it to see what it does versus ragebait sourcing reddit comments.
- mahirsaid 2y agoif that was done in the first place would you have understood the implication and reasoning behind it. Perhaps that this article has made light of something troubling someone else can make the research claims and provide facts. Nothing wrong with this submission. Not long ago my long time google account was shut down from inappropriate material hosted on my drive which was not made clear to me what it was. Along with 100's of photos of my mom and family that i don't have any copies of were deleted. I was under the assumptions it was my naked photos when i was a kid with my mom that triggered the Child-Porn detection system which is a shame that all those photos got deleted without any evidence or notice to what actually happened. So no i don't agree with your opinion, However i ask you to allow people the ability to surface insecurities that we all share with large tech.
- a022311 2y agoMore privacy-invading bloatware for Android users. This is like an app that demonstrates how chat control would work. Nobody stops Google from flagging "interesting" images/files as suspicious and uploading them to some cloud service for "examination". Besides, there are countless other ways to avoid exposure to CSAM. Google's move of installing the app without my permission makes me distrust the company even more. And they did the same thing again with "Android System Key Verifier" which has a different purpose, but they should have asked for my consent. My reaction: uninstalled both apps and turned off auto-updates. I thought I owned my smartphone.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoHow do we opt out
- hnpolicestate 2y agoEven more bizarre. I have an unrooted Android phone with the Safetycore all and I was able to uninstall it. Not the uninstall update either. The whole app. Prob will keep reinstalling?
- lakomen 2y ago[dead]
- atypeoferror 2y agoIs it just me, or is this outrage super amusing given the fact that for a long time you could search through you Google Photos (on Android, iOS or web) for e.g. “baby” and get a bunch of hits?
- lofaszvanitt 2y agoThis is article feels like it was authored by an anteater.
- dmantis 2y agoI've been very reluctant for several years to reinstall my stock Android on Pixel with GrapheneOS, as I don't want to backup lots of things, have partially broken banking apps and having another linux moment when I have to figure out bunch of workarounds from scratch, but it seems that Google doesn't give me any choice. One espionage scandal after another: first Pixels send their location even without location sharing to Google, then several attempts to add some AI crap with completely closed-source implementation and who-knows-what-it-does. Does anybody use it? Will I have a hard time migrating from Pixel's stock Android?
- hulitu 2y ago> Google's Unannounced Update Scans All Your Photos They don't release security updates, but updates to scan your fotos are ok.