160
Apple’s Decision to Kill Its CSAM Photo-Scanning Tool Sparks Fresh Controversy (www.wired.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 83 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Man, I remember the controversy when this initiative launched. Can't please anyone, it seems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I never supported since it was on device and given this is the US hashes to spot "extremism could be added" given apple doesn't know what the hashes are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    No you're wrong.

    They are not cryptographic hashes. They are "perceptual" hashes or "fuzzy" hashes. They're basically just a low resolution copy of the original image. It's trivial for an attacker to maliciously send innocent seeming images that are a hash collision. This is, by the way, a feature not a bug. Perceptual hashes are not designed to perform a perfect match.

    There are plenty of free white-papers on how perceptual hashes work, and Facebook's implementation is even open source.

    Apple said they tested 100 million perfectly legal images and three had collisions with a CSAM perceptual hash. When you consider how many photos Apple was proposing to scan (hundreds of trillions of photos) that means thousands of false positives would have occurred even if nobody maliciously abused the system.

    And because of all that - Apple was planning to do human reviews of every photo. They would, therefore, have seen every match (and every false positive). It couldn't have been hidden from Apple.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What makes you day apple didn't know what they are? Is this a thing that happened that I'm not aware of?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago*

    The consumer is not at fault for believing their personal data on their own hardrive, in the phone they paid for, should not be seen by anyone but themselves if they do not choose it to be.

    It's not the consumers fault for believing this to be the case given this is how computer technology always worked.

    Their only fault is for using Apple, when Apple has gone to extreme lengths to blur the line between what is your and what is theres, and effectively makes it impossible to keep things on your phone only on your phone unless you opt out of iCloud entirely. iCloud is so integrated, it's not clear to the user that everything on the phone is also on the cloud, and therefore not private.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent