It's a cost of doing business pretty much, you need to give the authorites access to customers data or they can go "but think of the children, there might be child abuse material in there!" and that's really damn hard to argue against.
Thus: checking stuff on-device and keeping the cloud locked so that not even the hoster can access it nor can they create a backdoor.
At least some cloud providers require a warrant before doing so.
But the point is that if the data is fully encrypted, no warrant will help against pure mathematics. A cloud provider cannot give something they have no access to.
Right, but your post kind of made it seem like they didn't. And with the CSASM stuff, they didn't need anything to match hashes. So what happens when that gets expanded to other types of content that they still don't need a warrant for? Like torrent files?
> But the point is that if the data is fully encrypted, no warrant will help against pure mathematics. A cloud provider cannot give something they have no access to.
Agreed, but most don't use encryption, and should still have privacy rights for their data.
The point of the system would've been that EVERYONE'S content would've been encrypted in the cloud without them needing to do anything.
Yes, you're right. But I've seen calls for phones to scan all content before being uploaded or encrypted, and it often feels, at least in some countries, that could still plausible happen. I suppose that's what I had in mind when I wrote my comment.
> But the exact same risk exists when you upload stuff to the cloud anyway and on an even bigger scale.
There's a difference with them actively doing it and announcing they are doing it, vs the possibility they are doing it silently without consent.