Okay.
> We have no idea what hashes they're checking images against; we can't see the raw data, and we can't see the hashes, and we can't see what they're sending to their servers.
Apple is getting the entire image regardless, this happens as part of the iCloud upload process.
> There is no technical reason why this needs to exist. If they want to scan iCloud photos for something, they can do that on their servers. iCloud is not end-to-end encrypted. Law enforcement can do whatever they want with the data you send there. Since they chose the client-side route, they have to be up to something, and it all smells very fishy.
It's a hell of a lot cheaper to distribute the load onto the device than to do it on GCP. However, this whole line of thinking is ridiculous, iOS is your operating system, it can send what it likes where it likes without you knowing about it. Why does this particular thing cause concern?
> Tomorrow, it will be for any discontent against whatever government wants to oppress its people this week -- and as time goes forward, that is not just third-world countries where you don't live, it could be your own.
> Do you really want to explain to the police at your door at 3:30 in the morning why you read a website called Hacker News? This is the first step towards that reality.
https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definit...
> Imagine I wrote a program that contained the phone numbers of people I don't like. The database is encrypted, and the only way to see if you're on that list is to install the app on your phone. The app does two things -- nothing if you're not on my list, or it sends me your location (at your expense!) if you are. Would you install that app? Absolutely not, that would be crazy. But that is basically what is bundled into iOS now.
Again, your overlooking the fact that this app is already coming from Apple the company that made iOS. They already control your phone, why would they need some additional app?
Then I guess it's not my operating system after all.
Umm... that happened.
I also get the slippery slope thing since you don't really have any control over what your device does but that's been true since forever. Running some scan() method and posting matches to a URL is something that literally could have been done in the last 10 years. It's not like this tech is magically enabling something that wasn't possible before.
And I do get the using your resources argument but iPhones have had integrated DRM since forever.
The thing I don't get is why now? Surely you should have left ages ago?
So turn off iCloud photos?
This service exists so Apple can E2EE your data while still placating DOJ.
It's a cop in your phone.
What they actually do is what is important. And what they actually do is publicly disclosed so you can make your choice appropriately.
Edit: The point here is that even if Apple tries very hard to make this be only about photos about to be uploaded to the cloud, if the percentage of phones that turns off iCloud storage increases as a response to this new "snitch-on-me" feature that will be a very good argument for law enforcement to ask for a list of IMEIs that are not using iCloud, and it will also tempt them to demand that Apple start scanning all files.
It's very simple. You want to upload images to iCloud? Then let your phone scan it and upload it. You don't want your images scanned? Don't upload them to iCloud.
Yet. Have you considered that this might be a necessary precursor to making iCloud e2e?
Sure. All the statements about why it’s not ok are also just speculation.
> why not release both features at the same time
That’s not how Apple typically works. They release a feature, try to make sure it works as expected and only then release the features that depend on it.
It’s as if USPS invented a new type of envelope that is physically impossible to open for anyone whose name is not written on the outside of it. Just one caveat: before they’ll give you any of these envelopes, you must allow them to read the letters being put inside.
If your concern is someone intercepting your mail before it gets to its intended recipient, this is great news. If your threat model involves federal agencies reading your mail, you’re no better off than you would be without these fancy new envelopes.
Yes, but this isn’t snooping.
This is what you were arguing. It is false.
It was clearly a technical statement not a privacy statement, so only superficial reading might lead one to believe it meant something that it did not.
That is why I replied that the person who replied to my comment, where I said I had argued something different, but that what he wrote was an excellent point.
So, what on earth are you so invested in that you feel the need to argue minutiae that don't apply?
That doesn’t change anything. It may be a pre-requisite from the perspective of their business. You replied to me and I didn’t constrain my point to just technicalities.
> So, what on earth are you so invested in that you feel the need to argue minutiae that don't apply?
It does apply. I’m simply pointing out that what you said is not correct.
You know, I could respect your opinion that this is where you draw the line, but you ignore all of Apple's history if you think this is the first step. This isn't the first step, this isn't the first chapter, this is at best the middle of the book where the plot twist happens.
No, this is clearly no the first step. This is the first step you chose to see the reality of the situation. You'll look back and you'll see how everything was paved with good intentions and how people sounding the alarm were ignored.
This isn't the first step.
There is no technical reason why this needs to exist. If they want to scan iCloud photos for something, they can do that on their servers. iCloud is not end-to-end encrypted. Law enforcement can do whatever they want with the data you send there. Since they chose the client-side route, they have to be up to something, and it all smells very fishy. Today, they say it's for CSAM. Tomorrow, it will be for any discontent against whatever government wants to oppress its people this week -- and as time goes forward, that is not just third-world countries where you don't live, it could be your own.
Do you really want to explain to the police at your door at 3:30 in the morning why you read a website called Hacker News? This is the first step towards that reality.
Imagine I wrote a program that contained the phone numbers of people I don't like. The database is encrypted, and the only way to see if you're on that list is to install the app on your phone. The app does two things -- nothing if you're not on my list, or it sends me your location (at your expense!) if you are. Would you install that app? Absolutely not, that would be crazy. But that is basically what is bundled into iOS now.
I really like my iPhone and iPad Pro. I like how Apple handles privacy in general. But I can't accept this. It's a step too far. You don't have to draw the line there, but I draw the line there.