> As far as I am aware, there is no mechanism on iOS by which images are "automatically pulled into" iCloud photos from anywhere, Messages or otherwise. Do you have a source or an example of how that could happen? When I receive images from my friends, they don't go into my photo library until I explicitly tap "save".

Per Apple [0]

>Shared with You works across the system to find the (...) photos, and more that are shared in Messages conversations, and conveniently surfaces them in apps like Photos (...) making it easy to quickly access the information in context.

---

>Yes, that's what I said. Enabling iCloud photos uploads your photo library to the cloud, so it's scanning your cloud photos.

Being disingenuous about it is still a thing though. You stated

> More accurately put, their intent is to scan cloud photos (...) (like every other cloud provider, including Google)

which makes it appear that the photos are only scanned server side "like every other cloud provider". Client side scanning is something that no other provider does, in contrast to what you stated.

[0]: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/06/ios-15-brings-powerfu....

Shared with You does not actually save the images to your photo library. It just surfaces them inside the Photos app. I will admit it's not very clear from the press release, but those are the facts.

I was not being disingenuous, frankly. I said that Apple is scanning your cloud photos, i.e. they are scanning photos that are uploaded to the cloud. Photos not being uploaded to the cloud are not scanned. I made no claims about where the scanning is happening, and I'm not particularly sure why it matters in any material sense.

You are thoroughly misrepresenting what Apple does. I initially thought you don't know what they do, but apparently you do very well.

Still: they scan photos locally - those are not cloud photos, those are local photos. And they have deployed the technical capability. You can bet that once capability exists, they will bend to government demands - there's ample precedent for that.

SO, yes, Apple, unlike all others, scans your photos locally. If they are going to be uploaded to cloud, or if they are forced to.

> Still: they scan photos locally - those are not cloud photos, those are local photos.

They are cloud photos. I say that because:

1. The photos are in the process of being uploaded to the cloud when they are scanned

2. The result of the scan is attached to the photo only when it is uploaded to the cloud. If the photo is deleted from the cloud, or the upload is canceled, the scan result is discarded

Practically, the system works precisely the same whether or not the scanning happens on device before the image reaches the cloud, or on the server after the image reaches the cloud.

The only well-intentioned argument about why on-device vs. on-server scanning matters is that "slippery slope" argument, which presupposes that:

1. Apple putting this scanning code in iOS not only somehow makes it easier/more tempting to use it for non-CSAM, but all but guarantees it will be used for non-CSAM.

2. Apple does not already have the ability to run whatever code they want, on any of your devices, without you ever knowing

3. Apple folds very easily to government demands, especially when it comes to privacy, their core differentiator

I don't think any of these are true. You might think they are, but then I'm not sure what point there is in discussing any more.

> or if they are forced to.

I'm not sure what this implies. If someone forces you to upload a photo to the cloud, surely that will get scanned regardless of whether the scanning is performed on-device or on-server?

This conversation is rather bizarre. The input to the scanning system is a sequence of bits, read from the flash memory in the phone.

Therefore, the scanning is local. There's really nothing more to it: The distinction is based on where the input is read from, in addition to where the input is processed. Both are happening inside the phone while you hold it in your hand.

It is scanning images locally.

This is totally unacceptable, and should never become acceptable.

I'm not claiming the distinction doesn't actually exist. Obviously the scanning is taking place on the phone. What I'm asking (which you have not actually answered) is: why does that make any sort of practical difference? Your argument is "it's happening on the phone, and that's self-evidentially bad".

And they've opened a door that others will walk through.

>2. Apple does not already have the ability to run whatever code they want, on any of your devices, without you ever knowing

This is what I don't understand about the whole argument about this CSAM debacle. I've read quite a bit of the discussion about this, as I'm someone who takes privacy fairly seriously, and it never really gets discussed. Could someone maybe point me in the direction of some literature about this? Is someone doing extensive load and packet analysis? Don't they(Apple) upload at least some E2E data?...

My iPhone already does an insane amount of "indexing", including image classification. This is all under the hood and I have no idea what else its doing, for all I know its mining Monero. Additionally all my iOS devices seem to send an inordinate amount of data to the cloud; I'm particularly sensitive to this because I don't have a strong internet connection, and frequently have to turn off WiFi on my phone or iPad when playing online games to stabilize my ping.

I'm also skeptical that you can really insure privacy from a 5 eyes country. Maybe I just read too many spy novels as a kid, but it doesn't take a lot of imagination for me to guess how any given decently large western company could be completely infiltrated by a multinational espionage coalition.

Idk, I tend to like that Apple is fighting against Ad-tech, as that power dynamic is at least believable. I do think that playing around with deGoogled Android is fun and in my experience is much more suited to dropping off the cellphone grid. I have an Android running Lineage and microG and with OSM and Kiwix(wikipedia is indispensable, IMO) as well as a handful of other apps, it serves the majority of the purposes of a cellphone without the need for data. I still daily drive my iPhone, mostly because the UX is a lot better than deGoogled Android.

There are tons of academic researchers, jailbreakers, privacy watchdogs, journalists, government organizations, exploit developers, tinkerers, and hackers of all kinds who would go wild if they found Apple doing malicious stuff on iPhones.

Now if Apple developed a special update that they sent to only a few choice targets, that might be able to go under the radar.

That can be said about any manufacturer of any electronics, and yet here we are in 2021 when practically all manufacturers have been caught doing highly immoral things in their devices, Apple notwithstanding.

You can wrap intrusions in form of 'think about the kids' (what is used here), think about security/terrorism and so on. This playbook has been used ad nausea, isn't it about time to learn?

> have been caught

That was my point: they get caught if/when they try.

> I'm not sure what this implies.

If _Apple_ are forced to (e.g. by a judge), and they can't claim the ask is technically impossible.

I know Whatsapp photos that I never even opened (from groups I probably muted long ago) end up in the phone library whenever I do the (manual) monthly photo dump to my PC.

But yes, I agree with the comment, there's no reason to hide between details: Apple plans to introduce the capability of scanning photos on your local device and comparing hashes against an opaque (non-reviewable) list of hashes that they (along with governments) control (details about how they plan to initially employ this capability are irrelevant).

Sure, but then don't pretend that this is not something every other cloud provider is doing (and has been doing) for years. This is only such a hot-button issue because 1) people love bashing Apple, and 2) Apple actually solicited feedback instead of implementing it silently behind the scenes.

Oh, I totally know all cloud providers are scanning photos in their cloud and I totally accepted that (hence why I mentioned I do manual photo drops from the phone and upload them to private cloud storage).

What no one has done before and what I totally don't accept is someone scanning photos on my device, which is what Apple is doing.

The in the cloud vs. on your device aspect of this debate is the most important part and cannot be glossed over.

> The in the cloud vs. on your device aspect of this debate is the most important part and cannot be glossed over.

I really do think it's a weird aspect to fixate on, though.

So long as Apple is only scanning the photos that're being uploaded to its servers, it genuinely doesn't matter to me where that scanning happens. It's a scan that could have happened in either location, and the version where it's happening locally is arguably more private/secure-from-fishing-expeditions. If I don't like that the scanning occurs, I can disable the uploading.

The distinction would matter if the local-scan involved things that weren't being uploaded. But it doesn't, so from my perspective the only difference is an implementation detail.

> If I don't like that the scanning occurs, I can disable the uploading.

You can already do that today (I do).

> But it doesn't

Maybe, maybe not. Even if I were to trust Apple 100% it's again a matter of principle (no local scanning).

Imagine the uproar if Microsoft Defender (which comes in-box enabled-by-default on all Windows 10/11 PCs) were to suddenly start scanning photos (it already scans executables and Office documents), hashing them against some opaque "database" and attaching tokens to suspicious ones that would be analyzed when uploaded to OneDrive (again, enabled by default for your Documents\Photos on Windows 10/11 if you use a MS Account).

Then on top of that, imagine Windows was a walled garden a-la iOS and you couldn't uninstall / disable / replace Defender with a different tool (which you totally can today).

I think there would be massive outrage in the press with MS being dragged through the mud for months, and droves of users switching to alternatives (like Linux) overnight. Yet (except for a few privacy / freedom organizations and a little press bleep) Apple gets to shake it off scot-free; I don't understand the dissonance.

It's interesting how our minds just give up when we realize all cloud providers are doing it. We accept our fate as weak consumers, unable to do anything.

WhatsApp has a "Save to Camera Roll" option which automatically saves all images and videos to your photo library.