Should I leave apple ecosystem in light of CSAM?

[usagora]

From my perspective, it makes no difference to me that I own my iPhone or that Apple owns their iCloud servers, or who really owns what at the end of the day, or at what step the photos get scanned by Apple. It's all the same outcome to me, and I don't really care whether it's being done via hardware or software.

Well based on the rest of your post, you sound like you're in agreement with me that this is not a bad thing that Apple is doing, but many people DO think that it's bad, and are calling Apple hypocritical in light of their strong stance on privacy. Because of that, I believe it IS important to point out the key distinction between files you keep to yourself solely on your iPhone and files you choose to upload to Apple's cloud service. Apple has never claimed files uploaded to iCloud are out of their reach or interest.

 

[usagora]

Nor did they want to scan iCloud photos until recently. San Bernardino shooting occurred ~6 years ago.

Oh, I'm sure they wanted to, but as I explained earlier, they hadn't figured out a way to do so in a manner that was to their level of privacy-consciousness. Now they have. And they still don't have access to your local storage. The scanning data is encrypted from their view - only time they can decrypt anything is regarding illegal images.

 

[vir]

Careful about licensed media.

 

[Abazigal]

So I take it you are very, very careful about making sure non-licensed concert videos you recorded on your phone, and ANY image that you've saved from the web that you did not obtain the proper rights from the author for, absolutely do NOT touch Apple's servers, and you employ special convoluted workarounds when dealing with these types of files across devices, so that they avoid iCloud servers altogether? I am correct to assume you are doing the just and moral thing here as a law-abiding Apple user, yes?

Well, if Apple has an issue with the sort of content I keep on my devices and on their services, they know where to find me.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

No, YOU don't get it. As Apple has so clearly explained had you bothered to do your due diligence to read the original sources that explain the process, Apple has no access to that scan data.

Nope. YOU still don’t get it. I HAVE read it. So don’t assume what someone else has and has not done or read. Did you do your due diligence and read my reasoning I posted earlier?

They hadn't scanned before because they hadn't figured out a way to do it in a manner they deemed privacy-conscious enough.

Source?

 

[usagora]

So I take it you are very, very careful about making sure non-licensed concert videos you recorded on your phone, and ANY image that you've saved from the web that you did not obtain the proper rights from the author for, absolutely do NOT touch Apple's servers, and you employ special convoluted workarounds when dealing with these types of files, so that they avoid iCloud servers altogether? I am correct to assume you are doing the just and moral thing here as a law-abiding Apple user, yes?

Your dripping sarcasm and snark are duly noted. Unlike CSAM (a far more serious crime, obviously), which will be prosecuted by the feds without anyone else's permission, individual copyright holders decide whether to issue a "cease and desist" or pursue legal action against those discovered to be in illegal possession or distribution of their IP. I would respect that fully, wouldn't you? If you, I, or anyone else is violating copyright laws, then we'll have to face the music without complaint. And, after all, is it really that hard to not put that stuff on the cloud? Ever heard of flash drives? They're these tiny, nifty, portable storage devices you can take with you everywhere (that's my bit of sarcasm to balance yours).

 

[crymimefireworks]

Nope. YOU still don’t get it. I HAVE read it. So don’t assume what someone else has and has not done or read. Did you do your due diligence and read my reasoning I posted earlier?

Source?

haha, isn't internet troll logic terrible?

1. I'm going to assume you haven't read anything and don't understand anything
2. Then I'm going to try to explain it all to you by writing it out. Surely that will make the difference!

Then Apple started using it too... "sorry for the confusion".

That was the moment Apple became a troll and I decided to switch.

 

[usagora]

Nope. YOU still don’t get it. I HAVE read it. So don’t assume what someone else has and has not done or read.

Then you need to work on your reading comprehension, because you give absolutely no evidence of even a basic grasp at what Apple explained.

Did you do your due diligence and read my reasoning I posted earlier?

Your reasoning is irrelevant. You're not the proverbial horse's mouth; Apple is.

Source?

Here's one:

Apple software head says plan to scan iPhones for child abuse images is 'misunderstood'

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Apple software chief Craig Federighi defends the company's plans to fight child abuse.

www.cnet.com

"If you look at any other cloud service, they currently are scanning photos by looking at every single photo in the cloud and analyzing it; we wanted to be able to spot such photos in the cloud without looking at people's photos," he [Federighi] said.

 

[usagora]

haha, isn't internet troll logic terrible?

1. I'm going to assume you haven't read anything and don't understand anything
2. Then I'm going to try to explain it all to you by writing it out. Surely that will make the difference!

Haha, aren't passive-aggressive posts like yours that are really meant to be an indirect reply to someone else terrible?

If you claim you've read a source, but then proceed to claim the source says something that it doesn't, what is the logical conclusion one may draw? Either 1. The person didn't actually read the source material or 2. They completely failed to understand it. There's no real positive option. I was kind in assuming the former option.

 

[vir]

Let's wait and see.

 

[hot-gril]

Oh, I'm sure they wanted to, but as I explained earlier, they hadn't figured out a way to do so in a manner that was to their level of privacy-consciousness. Now they have. And they still don't have access to your local storage. The scanning data is encrypted from their view - only time they can decrypt anything is regarding illegal images.

They already have access to every iCloud account's plain data, and their normal operations must require that too. They could scan the photos on-server without much of a change. Also, there's no way they didn't figure out on-device scanning until now.

 

[usagora]

And here is where it begins, that slippery slope. Defining what is serious, and what is not.

It's pretty "obvious" to anyone with their head screwed on straight that sexual abuse of children is a heinous crime, whereas copyright law violations are not. That doesn't mean copyright law violations are not serious, but rather of a totally different nature. However, reporting and prosecuting either one is not a bad thing. There is no "slope" here.

For now, it may seem black & white (obviously), but let's see where this definition leads us when money and power start taking more notice.

Queue the eerie music and make sure you get a dramatic voice actor to narrate this.

I prefer to stick with current reality instead of protesting a perfectly good and reasonable technology because of something in your imagination that *might* happen at a later time. We'll cross that bridge if/when it comes. I have every reason to suspect that just like Apple stood up to the FBI's demands that violated Apple's core principles, that they would also stand up to demands by government agencies to abuse THIS system.

 

[danny842003]

My only advice would be to not get too locked down into the Apple ecosystem. I'm talking Computer, Watch, iPhone, iPad. If you think at some point you may leave, it will be much harder the more devices in you are. For instance the Apple Watch can only be used with the iPhone. As my iPhone XR is now three years old, I'm up for a new smartphone but now if I decide to deviate away from the iPhone, my watch will not work with it. At the same time, there really isn't anything about the new iPhones that compels me to buy one. So, I'm either sticking with the XR for at least another year or buying something else and then deciding if I want to try a different watch or just go back to a classic automatic.

I get that train of thought but I also think it’s leads you to a situation where you have a worse experience. The idea of purposely not getting yourself too deep in to the ecosystem because you may wish to leave in the future seems foolish to me.
I think you could replace any single device (watch, phone, laptop etc) and get a pretty comparable experience but in my opinion at least the thing that sets Apple apart is the ecosystem, without that I don’t believe the extra cost is really worth it.

 

[usagora]

They already have access to every iCloud account's plain data, and their normal operations must require that too. They could scan the photos on-server without much of a change. Also, there's no way they didn't figure out on-device scanning until now.

They've probably had it in the works for years. I also think it's hilarious how you're opposed to on-device scanning (hidden from Apple's eyes), yet seem perfectly fine with Apple analyzing every one of your photos in the cloud. It seems like you and so many others have this psychological preconception when you hear the phrase "on-device scanning" that pictures Apple employees remotely logged into your phone, casually perusing all your content. This is the polar opposite of what's actually happening.

 

[hot-gril]

They've probably had it in the works for years. I also think it's hilarious how you're opposed to on-device scanning (hidden from Apple's eyes), yet seem perfectly fine with Apple analyzing every one of your photos in the cloud. It seems like you and so many others have this psychological preconception when you hear the phrase "on-device scanning" that pictures Apple employees remotely logged into your phone, casually perusing all your content. This is the polar opposite of what's actually happening.

I didn't say I'm ok with Apple analyzing photos on the cloud and reporting offenses to the police. It's even worse on-device, though.

 

[vir]

I understand.

 

[usagora]

I didn't say I'm ok with Apple analyzing photos on the cloud and reporting offenses to the police. It's even worse on-device, though.

So, a scanning method that hides as much data from Apple as possible is worse than a method that reveals all to them? Color me confused as to where you're coming from on this one... I also don't understand your stance that it's a bad thing to report crimes to the police, especially if you've discovered them by perfectly legal means. This is absolutely not an "unreasonable search and seizure" since everyone agrees to it by using the iCloud service.

 

[hot-gril]

So, a scanning method that hides as much data from Apple as possible is worse than a method that reveals all to them? Color me confused as to where you're coming from on this one... I also don't understand your stance that it's a bad thing to report crimes to the police, especially if you've discovered them by perfectly legal means. This is absolutely not an "unreasonable search and seizure" since everyone agrees to it by using the iCloud service.

The photos on iCloud are visible to Apple either way, so they're not preserving any privacy by doing this. In this case they also put a scanner onto the phone that could easily be used in the future on local files. What makes it so bad is how unnecessary it is.

Mass surveillance is a large topic. I'm against mass surveillance, and there's tons of reading available on why it's a bad thing, despite the obvious short-term advantage of catching more criminals.

 

[vir]

Do you support Facebook?

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Then you need to work on your reading comprehension, because you give absolutely no evidence of even a basic grasp at what Apple explained.

It seems like you didn’t read my post as you don’t understand my points at all nor are you even addressing them. 🙄

Your reasoning is irrelevant. You're not the proverbial horse's mouth; Apple is.

As a customer of theirs, I beg to differ. But I get it...you think your opinion is more important than mine or anyone else’s. Got it.

Here's one:

That article does not support your claim that they couldn’t do it until now, so I can only gather that you are just assuming that and have no actual source for what is really just your opinion.

Haha, aren't passive-aggressive posts like yours that are really meant to be an indirect reply to someone else terrible?

If you claim you've read a source, but then proceed to claim the source says something that it doesn't, what is the logical conclusion one may draw? Either 1. The person didn't actually read the source material or 2. They completely failed to understand it. There's no real positive option. I was kind in assuming the former option.

I both read and understand it. My issues haven’t even been addressed by you. Instead you have gone off on a tangent that I wasn’t even on. 🤷‍♂️

 

[usagora]

The photos on iCloud are visible to Apple either way, so they're not preserving any privacy by doing this.

Sure they are! They COULD also build a backdoor into your iPhone, but they choose not to. They COULD "look" at (scan) all your photos on iCloud, but they choose not to. This is a GOOD thing.

 

[Marshall73]

I am a new apple customer, recently joining from samsung and windows, now own iphone 12 and MBA M1. A number of factors made me move to apple, but two of the biggest ones are reliability and privacy.

And now the CSAM. I feel like i made the wrong move switching to apple.

Should I leave apple because of this CSAM thing?

Yes, sell that stuff and buy a Linux phone and laptop. Then make sure you don’t use the internet or email. Then you have 100% privacy. Even better, sell your kit and buy a notepad and pencil then burn the notes after writing them, 100% privacy guaranteed.

 

[usagora]

It seems like you didn’t read my post as you don’t understand my points at all nor are you even addressing them. 🙄

Please cut the BS. I've clearly addressed every one of your "points." First, you gave an irrelevant analogy about someone making an illegal search in your house - I responded that this is not at all comparable to what Apple is doing here. Then you stated you didn't like that the scan is local - I responded by explaining how this is a highly secure/private way of scanning for CSAM (as Apple clearly explained). Finally, you asked why they weren't concerned about their servers until now - which I demonstrated was a false assumption.

So I addressed your points - just because you didn't like my answers doesn't mean I didn't address them.

As a customer of theirs, I beg to differ. But I get it...you think your opinion is more important than mine or anyone else’s. Got it.

Complete straw man. I clearly stated (again, back to reading comprehension) that you're not the horse's mouth, APPLE (not I) is. Apple's explanation of how this technology works trumps your or my opinion of how WE think it works or any imaginary scenario in our heads of how it will be used in the future.

That article does not support your claim that they couldn’t do it until now, so I can only gather that you are just assuming that and have no actual source for what is really just your opinion.

If you're looking for a literal quote from Federighi that says, "We couldn't do this until now" then I'm going to have to disappoint you. Most people can use deductive reasoning to conclude this based on other facts. It's not that they couldn't do it as in it was impossible, but rather that they didn't develop the technology to their satisfaction until now. I'm sure they've been working on this for years. This isn't something you develop in a hurry. Why would Apple have the tech ready to go and then just sit on it? Makes no sense.

If you're going to assign some nefarious, ulterior motive to their deployment of this technology at this time, then you better have hard evidence. I've seen absolutely ZERO of that from you or anyone else. All you have are fallacious slippery slope arguments.

I both read and understand it. My issues haven’t even been addressed by you. Instead you have gone off on a tangent that I wasn’t even on. 🤷‍♂️

Again, yes they have been addressed, and I will not waste any more time addressing any further "issues" you may have, because you're not listening. Bye!

 

[vir]

Apple is my everything.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Please cut the BS. I've clearly addressed every one of your "points."

You should probably take your own advice as you have NOT addressed every one of my points. But hey, at least you said “please”.

If you're looking for a literal quote from Federighi that says, "We couldn't do this until now" then I'm going to have to disappoint you. Most people can use deductive reasoning to conclude this based on other facts.

So again it was your opinion. As I thought. You shouldn’t be stating opinions as if they are facts.