This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist.
That sounds a bit like the Onion sketch "Google allows you to opt-out of tracking by moving to remote mountain village" [1].
This case proves that the criminal justice system works to protect your personal images, we just need a better way to be notified when it happens (the kind of action you would expect Apple to take if they cared, instead of "we continued to strengthen our vendor protocols")
The only reason they got caught is because they uploaded the pictures/videos to her Facebook. If they had sent them to a porn site instead they would have gotten away with it. The grandparent is largely correct, if sexually explicit photos/videos of you make it onto a digital device controlling their distribution is difficult at best.
This is true, but focusing on nudes is somewhat missing the real point (and could be interpreted as victim blaming): this story is another example why your email and bank information should never make it on to a digital device. If pictures aren’t safe, then no information is safe. We all have chosen to put information on our devices that is not safe to publish.
Just to be clear: definitely not my intention. The victim is not in any way at fault here, this story is yet another warning to the rest of us.
> then no information is safe
This is definitely true. When I was still on Facebook, I intentionally changed my profile to public (because it ultimately is), and only shared information I was comfortable with the world knowing. Now that you've made this point, off the top of my head, I have realized that my digital footprint has grown more innocuous (apart from taxes and BS like that).
Assuming that focusing on nudes is victim blaming: how is focusing on email less problematic than that?
This might be the only surefire way now, but it's not how it should be. How it should be is that a HIIPA-like wrath of god may descend on you if it turns out you mishandle someone's data like this.
Can be charged as a felony and can land you on the sex offender registry.
Even Apple themselves shouldn't be able to access your stuff.
Not victim shaming: according to the article this is what Apple tells you to do.
* cough cellbrite.
> iCloud secures your information by encrypting it when it's in transit, storing it in iCloud in an encrypted format, and using secure tokens for authentication. For certain sensitive information, Apple uses end-to-end encryption. This means that only you can access your information, and only on devices where you’re signed into iCloud. No one else, not even Apple, can access end-to-end encrypted information.
> End-to-end encryption requires that you have two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID. Keeping your software up-to-date and using two-factor authentication are the most important things that you can do to maintain the security of your devices and data.
Then it lists what is end-to-end encrypted when the criteria is met, mail, photos, messages are not listed.
I really resonate with his opening point; that somehow there's this belief that the "authorised man can't be a creep". This same logic I see paraded about across a number of other sectors to discredit small businesses and institutions.
Why the does tech get a low bar?
Apple does tout absolute privacy:
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/04/apples-iphone-pri...
It definitely isn't an argument for that. It's an argument for cleaning your device before handing it to anybody together with the password. That is the only situation when you're at risk.