She's 24, but could pass for much younger. I'm paranoid that I'll get flagged.. Especially since all of her tik-toks with any skin shown, or any drinking get flagged.
She's 24, but could pass for much younger. I'm paranoid that I'll get flagged.. Especially since all of her tik-toks with any skin shown, or any drinking get flagged.
What if you take a picture of your naked baby in the bathtub or your child on the beach, and the picture is very similar to a known CSAM picture with a hash in the database, enough to pass the distance threshold they're using?
The picture would be sent for screening, the Apple screener would indeed say that's a naked baby/child, and soon enough you've got the FBI (or whatever is the equivalent in your country) knocking on your door and arresting you for pedophilia.
Considering PhotoDNA, the source code of Apple's implementation, a 30-year Ph.D. level in cryptographic knowledge, and the processes by which neuralMatch actually run are unavailable to the OP, I think OP is justified in the minor paranoia of not wanting to be falsely accused of owning CSAM.
That's precisely the problem with Apple's announcement here. You can't apply common sense to an algorithm and dragnet-style surveillance.
I doubt even Apple specifically knows precisely how things will turn out with this system.
This is not accurate. Apple is using perceptual hashes. If the features of an image are close enough to an image in the NCMEC database it may generate a matching hash.