6 ms·
> CSAM scanning is irrelevant to 99.99999% of Apple's customers How long until an group of governments tells Apple to add Tank Man to the list?
by neolog 5y ago
> CSAM scanning is irrelevant to 99.99999% of Apple's customers
How long until an group of governments tells Apple to add Tank Man to the list?
- hughrr 5y agoExactly this. I see lots of people saying that Apple are forced to implement something via legislation as if it’s an excuse for it. If they want to do business in China they will be forced by their legislation. My entire argument is don’t build the mechanism.
- floatingatoll 5y agoChina forced Apple by legislation to implement new iCloud algorithms for assigning China-region user data into China-hosted datacenters. Most countries, unlike the US, are not constrained by a requirement to only exercise previously-built mechanisms and not create new ones, in response to government demands. If China decides to require Apple to censor non-CSAM content on-device, they will do so whether or not CSAM content fingerprinting exists. That China has not done so is because they benefit greatly from Apple's manufacturing and sales and do not wish to create a diplomatic incident with Apple.
- cyanite 5y ago> China-hosted China-decryptable datacenters. China hosted, yes, but Apple denies China-decryptable, so that’s speculation unless you have a good source.
- floatingatoll 5y agoNope, that's just me remembering wrong. Deleted those two words, thanks for the correction :)
- floatingatoll 5y agoWhy would they bother? That's a terrible way to approach it. Just pass legislation requiring in-country datacenters that can be decrypted by thoughtcrime enforcers, like Russia and China are doing. Trying to get this done via a CSAM list that's absurdly closely audited would be a huge waste of time and not provide any significant benefit, and if such a request were ever made public, would likely result in severe political and economic sanctions. That's what everyone's missing in this argument. There's no need to be all underhanded and secretive when you can just pass laws and conduct military-backed demands upon companies using those laws. Trying to exploit the CSAM process would be a horrifically bad idea, and would result in public exposure and humiliation, rather than the much more useful outcome that simply passing a law would provide.
- neolog 5y agoWithout the technology deployed, Apple can (and did) say they don't have the ability to break into users' phones. If Apple deploys on-phone scanning, governments can just tell Apple to support a new list. It won't be the NCMEC CSAM list. It will be a "public safety and security" list. I wouldn't rule out underhandedness either. [1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/technology/china-uighurs-hackers-malware-hackers-smartphones.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/technology/china-uighurs-...
- floatingatoll 5y agoApple already has technology deployed to perform binary file scans of every file on macOS and iOS, and the ability to at any time release signatures for those scans, that are very difficult for normal users to prevent updates for. They've had that for years, maybe even a decade by now, and so far to date we have seen no abuse of that list. How is Apple's new CSAM list somehow increasing the chances of Apple going rogue, given that we've all been living with that risk for the past X years?
- neolog 5y agoWhat technology are you referring to as already deployed?