![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ya'll realize that every other cloud company has been doing this for years now, correct? I'd prefer Apple not do it either, but it's hilarious how people only care about this stuff and have a hissy fit when Apple announces it. Keep in mind, none of the others, like Adobe and Google, never announced it. It was just shadow introduced.
I guess that makes sense.. I guess it just hit home right then reading about it. and I am not sure I had a full on hissy.. lol.
Everyone else puts the pedo hash db on your device and scans your local pictures before they've been uploaded to the cloud?
I imagine most use Google or Azure PhotoDNA service that microsoft offer for free (thus not the local device), but almost all of them do scan them now.
I get the slippery slope and one day it would be different but not for now, it is pretty much the exact same (just apple saving money) it seem to me.
That sound false:
But (if I understand) it is after you asked your phone to upload the file on the cloud system, which will be there in a mere second and would have occurred there (and I imagine still will has the DB grow) anyway, making that quite semantic (about who pay for the electricity and etc...), making it virtually the same in every effect, beside who pay for the processing and current.
It is and it isn't different. If you're dumb enough to store any data on "the cloud" you should know that anything there can and will be scanned even though the company should never do it. It's there and they're going to do whatever they can with your data.
I feel that part sound almost like a misunderstanding of hashing of image technology (it could be my understanding of it obviously).
Which would have put the image on iCloud, which would have scanned them in the very same way, the only change here is saving cloud processor by running it on the phone itself no ?
It's not a matter of more or less privacy. It's a matter of having privacy or having none at all. There should be no scanning of any photos or other data on your phone. Catching pedos is just fine, as long as it doesn't intrude on my privacy and my rights. If they want to catch pedos, law enforcement needs to gather evidence and obtain a warrant to do so. That is enshrined in the Constitution of the United States and this forced addition by Apple violates that.
You shouldn't trust any company.
The idea is that a lot of smart people will be looking at the code and will find things if things are to be found. You know, like installing software to scan all you photos for pedo stuff.
This is why Paul Daniels exists. If there's a hardware backdoor then Apple broke it and we'll need to fix it. Also this doesn't excuse Apple not having open source code for their software.
That is exactly the issue.
Reminds me of the idiots complaining about Apple stealing your fingerprints when TouchID came out. I wonder if these are the same type of people that thought cameras were stealing their souls 130 years ago.
Yeah, that’s what I’ve thought why they are doing this. By moving it to the host device they can implement full end to end security since they can’t scan it on the cloud anymore if they did this.
There are probably two reasons Apple is doing this on the host device instead of cloud. Firstly, probably a lot of people aren't using the cloud or at least not as many as Apple would like. Secondly, it saves resources. They're using your hardware, your electricity, and your data to do their work. They know you can't or won't stop them because you're too ignorant to how these devices work to begin with.
That's debatable because for some time now we've been told that a lot of the stuff in our stuff is not owned by us. You can buy a car now and have physical features you can't use because you gotta pay extra to unlock it. None of this has been tested in court because most of the time any lawsuit is settled outside of court.
Good luck with that without access to the source code. It'll eventually become like the elevator buttons where you press it thinking it does something but there's no wires going to the button. It's there to make you feel better about your actions.
That'll never happen and Apple as well as everyone else will try to stop you. Most software is in a legal grey area where you license it but own the product that the software is running on. But the product won't work without the software so what's the point? Again, nothing legally tested and all you have to go by is an end user agreement.
What we should focus on is having Apple and everyone else release their source code for their OS. That way we can look through the code and compile it and then install it onto our phones if we choose to do so. You aren't going to force Apple to change how they operate if you can't see how they operate. There's a reason why so many servers run Linux which releases all their source code.
Servers run on Linux because Linux is way easier to just do shit on when it comes to management, scripting, and reliability. Open source is just a perk, but no one is reviewing that code. You think people review all the code when they run yum update? They put a list of trusted repos and call it a day. However, trusted repos get compromised constantly, which is generally how Red Hat had a business model…
That would make it impossible to scan older photo has the database of illegal photo grow too.
Well that’s what they’ve said. The ticket is generated at the time the photo is first taken/put into the photo library on the phone.
Yes but did they say that they will never scan it again over the year on the iCloud has well ?
Read their tech sheet. They generate a ticket, the ticket gets uploaded along with the photo. The ticket is what they look at.
Ok yes they will relook the ticket, but how does the human validation step be possible if one day it tick has positive has DB updates ? I guess they could simply silently delete them.
No. It doesn't ask you each and every time if you want to have the image scanned and a report sent to law enforcement or some organization in order to determine if you've done something illegal. It also doesn't inform you that you are waiving your rights against unlawful search and seizure and that by doing so you may be incriminating yourself. It would also need to do that for every single photo/file that is sent.
You agree to the EULA when you activate iCloud on the phone, not to mention the EULA when you use the phone itself for the first time. Further, them sending this data to a private org is not unlawful search & seizure. You can make that claim all you want, but you are factually wrong.
And you just proved why this is an end run around the Constitution. And I wouldn't be too sure about it not being illegal. The only use of this (at this time) is to proactively find something possibly illegal in order to pass it off to law enforcement. There is literally no other use for it. This means someone is being used as a state actor and therefore the Constitution and those pesky Amendments are required to be followed. If not, any and all evidence is useless and anything obtained by using that illegal evidence will also be useless.
With a little option do not ask again. But for you, that does know about it (or the few reading the agreement), that nuance become really small it seem to me, specially that is purely on where some part of an hashing process occur that seem to botter you, why everything you say should not already be true ? Purely because your own device is being used in some way in the process, that could be an important nuance for the future, but for the current implementation that seem to change nothing in practice. The picture were already scanned on arrival, the thing that change is moving that a bit.
It has been court tested:
Except you backed up my argument perfectly. Did you not read the last part about a state actor? This also has nothing to do with something on your personal device. Again, this case is about information stored on someone else's servers.
