The FBI off their back that they aren’t doing enough to stop the spread of CP.
As far as we know (and I'm sure lots of eyeballs are looking now) Android doesn't do this.
And frankly, why would Apple care that the FBI isn't cozy with them. Their entire brand is "security and privacy", kind of goes against most 3 Letter Agencies anyway.
Android does not do on-device scanning, but Google does scan photos after they are uploaded to their cloud photo service. It's not on-device scanning, but the effect is functionally identical: photos that are being uploaded to the cloud are being scanned for CSAM. The only real distinction is who owns the CPU which computes the hash.
I doubt it's the FBI pressuring Apple. My suspicion is it's fear of the US Congress passing worse, even more privacy-invading laws under the guise of combating CSAM. If Apple's lobbyists can show that iPhones are already searching for CSAM, arguments for such laws get weaker.
So did Apple, and pretty much all cloud hosting providers.
This, on device, scanning is what's new, and very out of character for Apple.
> If Apple's lobbyists can show that iPhones are already searching for CSAM, arguments for such laws get weaker.
I'm not aware of any big anti-CSAM push being made by Congress. CSAM just isn't really a big issue in the US, the existing laws, and culture, are pretty effective already.
Ethics aside, on-device scanning has the benefit of Constitutional protection, at least in the USA. Because the searching is being performed on private property, any attempt by the Government to try to expand the scope of searches would be a clear-cut 4th Amendment violation.
(Whereas if the scanning is done in the cloud, Government can compel searches and that would fall under the "third party doctrine" which is an end-run around the 4th Amendment.)
It's it though? The device someone bought 2 years ago suddenly starts reporting them to the FBI's Anti-CSAM unit without the owners realistic consent does seem like a run-around to unpermissioned government searches. It's not reasonable to say "throw away your $1200 device if you don't consent", is it? Nor can a person reasonably avoid iOS updates that force this feature to be active.
> any attempt by the Government to try to expand the scope of searches
We've seen private companies willfully censor individuals at the government's behest under the current administration - will Apple begin expanding the search and reporting mechanisms just to stay in whatever administration's good grace?
Like I said, this is extremely out of character, and very off-brand for Apple. Why would someone trust Apple going forward? Even Google's Android doesn't snitch on it's owners to law enforcement... Setting aside all the ways for nefarious actors to abuse this system and sic LE on innocent individuals.
Yes. Your phone is your private property, just like your house or your car. Searching your private property requires a warrant or reasonable suspicion, otherwise it's a 4th Amendment violation.
This twitter thread is worth a read.
https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/14248736290037022...
You can't realistically avoid the iOS update. Apple has effectively given consent on your behalf... How will that fly?
If you're concerned about other forms of scanning compelled by the Government, you never consented to the search. So even if Apple complied, the search is invalid and cannot be used to prosecute you.
As previously mentioned, Android doesn't scan all photos on your device... Google scans content uploaded to their servers. Which is reasonable... It's their servers, they can host what they want. Your iPhone is your iPhone.
Citation?
From everything I've read, from Apple and other sources, if the photo is about to be uploaded to iCloud Photo Library then it is scanned for CSAM. If it's not, it isn't.
Still waiting on that citation.
Still waiting on that citation.
This is a dangerously false understanding of the law. Stop giving legal advice. You are not a lawyer.
I'm curious, do you think that the Third Party Doctrine applies here?
All things current at social media companies seem willing to censor after suggestion of the administration.
I don't think you're being serious.
The only realistic alternative to Apple is Android... And Google is pretty darn transparent in their spying on users. Apple just did a 180 degree about-face on all the branding they've built over the last decade. Why should anyone trust Apple again?
Look, this whole neural-hash thing took what, 2 weeks for people to fabricate collisions? This just illustrated how poorly conceived and ill-thought the entire plan was from Apple. It's not beyond reason to assume any of these things given the evidence we currently have.
Right now. The best time for Apple to do this is when cannot be painted as a defensive move against any specific legislation. The CSAM argument has been used many times in the past and it's certain to be used many more times in the future.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/us/online-child-sexual-ab...
As a result, people will focus their arguments instead on the technological flaws in the current implementation of on-device scanning or slippery slope arguments that are unlikely to become reality, the feature will be added anyway with no political opposition, and in the end Apple and/or the government will get what they want, for what they consider the greater good.
I think that absolute privacy in society as a whole isn't attainable with those values in place, and it raises many questions regarding to what extent the Internet should remain free from moderation. Are there really no kinds of information that are so fundamentally damaging that they should not be allowed to exist on someone's hard drive? If not, who will be in control of moderating that information? Maybe we will have to accept that some tradeoffs between privacy and stability need to be made for the collective good, in limited circumstances.
Where does this assumption come from? Because of iOS lower market share? Are you implying they are more prevalent in Android devices? In desktop computers? I don't understand the logic.
You don't have to be particularly tech savvy to know it's a bad idea to co-mingle your deepest darkest secrets alongside photos of your mum and last night's dinner. Especially when discovering those secrets would lead to estrangement, or prison.
As for the few who might be doing it currently, that's likely to plummet quickly. If you think Apple's move caused waves in the Hacker News crowd, just imagine how much it has blown up in the CSAM community right now. I dare say it's probably all they've been talking about for the past two weeks.
"Last year, for instance, Apple reported 265 cases to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, while Facebook reported 20.3 million, according to the center’s statistics. That enormous gap is due in part to Apple’s decision not to scan for such material, citing the privacy of its users."
If you were a law enforcement agency and noticed this discrepancy, would you believe that you'd be letting some number of child abusers get away because of that difference in 20 million reports? iCloud probably doesn't have the same level of adoption as Facebook, but the gap is still very large.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/05/technology/apple-iphones-...