Will you leave the Apple ecosystem because of CSAM?

[PandaPunch]

I am guessing that the sick humans that traffic what Apple is going after are much more complex in how they store/trade/distribute than just being on their phone. Much more than QMAGA folks IMO.

They can be far more tech savvy than the QMAGA types, but just as often can have zero clue about computers. If you're familiar with the UK's Operation Cathedral which resulted in a massive world wide sting CSAM creators and traders of people ranging from tech savvy people to everyday taxi and truck drivers, then it's easy to see this as a way to catch one of the weaker links of a pedophile ring.

 

[dk001]

By the way, Apple can remote control your iPhone. They’ve done it with mine. What kind of back door is this? Why aren’t people worried about that?

You have to grant them access though.

 

[PBz]

Uh, don't put child porn on their servers, and you can continue to use their cloud based photo storage.

This isn't complicated.

You aren't getting it. No one is arguing that stuff isn't evil. We are arguing the on-device scanning is not only not only an infringement on our rights (Amendment IV) but a U-Turn by Apple on their Privacy stance.

 

[dk001]

I can continue, but only if I allow them to scan everything I have on it. And, to add insult to the injury, they're using my own device to do their work. Nice, isn't it?

There is a group on here who will never see an issue with this no matter the facts or concerns you roll out. They are not interested in a discussion, only in trying to find a way to prove you wrong and convince you to change your opinion.

Mostly a worthless discussion.

 

[Jayson A]

You have to grant them access though.

RIGHT NOW you do, but what about in the future when they change the code and sneak it into an iOS update?

See how ridiculous you sound now?

 

[usagora]

It's not that simple. They've lured me into spending a lot of money on their phones and tablets, and the iCloud and overall ecosystem was a very strong point in their marketing, and one of the major reasons why I went with Apple. Now that they've got me tied to their ecosystem, they start imposing unbearable conditions for continuing to use it, on the grounds that "you're free to leave if you don't like it". That's unfair to say the least.

Anyway, as I said, I don't object to Apple scanning what I send to the cloud. I only object to my own device, my processing power, my battery, being used for that. My own device is doing extra work for them. That's not right.

Unbearable conditions? It seems people are still not understanding that Apple is seeing NOTHING about your photos as long as they're all legal (which I trust they are in your case). That's the whole point of the on-device scanning - it's totally private. It may be your phone, but it's Apple's software your'e running on it, and you knew that was your only option when you purchased the phone. They own their software and have full control over it. The "my processing power/battery/etc." argument comes across as a desperate "I've gotta find an objection" type argument. It's just so trivial. Unless you have some sort of guarantee from Apple in writing that says you get your money back if they ever implement an iOS update you don't like, then you have little room to complain. And there's plenty of other options for storing your photos online that don't use on-device scanning (since you seem to be ok with the less private on-the-cloud scanning method).

 

[dk001]

Your device is ALREADY doing work for them. It's decrypting the encrypted apps/music and confirming you paid them the right amounts of money to use those files. It's calling home to see if you paid enough money, in the right way, to have your SIM unlocked. It performs diagnostics, reports errors, etc.. All of that is work apple wants done -- and it's happening on your device!

Wait'll you hear about what Android phones do without your knowledge!

However that work does not have the intent to find illegal items and report you to the authorities.

Your last line, I would be interested and I have recently deGoogled (80%?) my Android.

 

[Jayson A]

Unbearable conditions? It seems people are still not understanding that Apple is seeing NOTHING about your photos as long as they're all legal (which I trust they are in your case). That's the whole point of the on-device scanning - it's totally private. It may be your phone, but it's Apple's software your'e running on it, and you knew that was your only option when you purchased the phone. They own their software and have full control over it. The "my processing power/battery/etc." argument comes across as a desperate "I've gotta find an objection" type argument. It's just so trivial. Unless you have some sort of guarantee from Apple in writing that says you get your money back if they ever implement an iOS update you don't like, then you have little room to complain. And there's plenty of other options for storing your photos online that don't use on-device scanning (since you seem to be ok with the less private on-the-cloud scanning method).

That's what I don't get. People say "It's your cloud, you can do whatever you want with my photos then, but not RIGHT AS I'M UPLOADING THEM. THAT'S A STEP TOO FAR!!!" Makes no sense to me.

 

[dk001]

You aren't getting it. No one is arguing that stuff isn't evil. We are arguing the on-device scanning is not only not only an infringement on our rights (Amendment IV) but a U-Turn by Apple on their Privacy stance.

Never mind it does nothing to clean up their servers.

 

[usagora]

They have it right on their website.
Here is FB's: https://www.facebook.com/safety/onlinechildprotection
These generally go in via the NCMEC tipline: https://www.missingkids.org/cybertipline

Also watched this on a TWIT live on Youtube where they had an NCMEC board member, a former NCMEC board member, and a CBS investigative journalist. Leo (host) was shaking his head over some of the stuff discussed.

Huh? You claimed

It can take weeks to years to get to an actual LEO knocking on your door level investigation.

Neither of the links you provided above said anything about how long it takes for law enforcement to respond to NCMEC reports.

 

[dk001]

RIGHT NOW you do, but what about in the future when they change the code and sneak it into an iOS update?

See how ridiculous you sound now?

I don't as you keep forgetting what my stance is and what my point is.

But that is what I get (your post) for asking an honest question.

 

[usagora]

We are arguing the on-device scanning is not only not only an infringement on our rights (Amendment IV) but a U-Turn by Apple on their Privacy stance.

It's actually neither. First of all, the Fourth Amendment doesn't even apply to your personal use of an operating system / cloud service (both of which are things you agree to do so in a manner consistent with their policies). The Fourth Amendment is between you and the government. Secondly, on-device scanning is completely more private than Apple decrypting and scanning all your photos on their server. Apple has no access to on-device processes and that information is not sent to Apple unless there's a CSAM match.

 

[PBz]

It's actually neither. First of all, the Fourth Amendment doesn't even apply to your personal use of an operating system / cloud service (both of which are things you agree to do so in a manner consistent with their policies). That's between you and the government. Secondly, on-device scanning is completely more private than Apple decrypting and scanning all your photos on their server. Apple has no access to on-device processes and that information is not sent to Apple unless there's a CSAM match.

I think the 4th does apply to my phone. Per your last sentence, how does Apple get a match without proactively scanning my phone? If the 4th doesn't apply to the phone a whole lot of law enforcement agencies would like to know about this.

 

[PBz]

It's actually neither. First of all, the Fourth Amendment doesn't even apply to your personal use of an operating system / cloud service (both of which are things you agree to do so in a manner consistent with their policies). That's between you and the government. Secondly, on-device scanning is completely more private than Apple decrypting and scanning all your photos on their server. Apple has no access to on-device processes and that information is not sent to Apple unless there's a CSAM match.

c. Law enforcement

The ability to collect data on where a person has gone and what they have been doing is valuable information for law enforcement. If you are the subject of an investigation or even if you have just been pulled over, police may want to see what you’ve been doing and where you’ve been going – things your smartphone may be able to reveal. The Supreme Court has recognized that smartphones pose a unique privacy concern. Law enforcement officers must have a search warrant before they can search the contents of a smartphone.


Law enforcement has also been known to tap into the locations of smartphones, ask wireless providers to turn over troves of location data, pay third parties to unlock smartphones, and implant tracking devices. They may also request data your smartphone provider has collected about you, and can subpoena any of the intermediary service providers or connected services for any information that you’ve authorized them to collect. Federal privacy laws have not kept up with the pace of technology and courts are unclear on how easy it should be for law enforcement to gain access to your smartphone and its data.

 

[PBz]

Turning over a password to law enforcement is an invasion of privacy that goes beyond a warrant to search the phone. If officers obtain a valid search warrant for an individual’s cell phone, that warrant should include the authority to direct the individual to unlock the phone. However, an officer may not force an individual to reveal the password. If an individual refuses to type in the password, officers may require him to use his thumbprint or facial recognition (if applicable) to unlock the phone.

[1] See, United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435, 443 (1976).

 

[usagora]

I think the 4th does apply to my phone.

If an LEO approaches you in public and demands to search your phone without probable cause or a warrant, then the 4th Amendment applies. Do you see the difference? Apple is not a government agency - they're a private entity that is licensing the use of their mobile operating system to you, and you agree to abide by their rules to use both it and their cloud service. Everything is in writing and legal.

Per your last sentence, how does Apple get a match without proactively scanning my phone?

They ARE proactively scanning your phone, but they are blind to that process - it's all happening on your end via software. The ONLY time Apple is allowed to see any scan results is once 30+ illegal images are uploaded, and that data is only about those specific images. They have explained this on their website from the start:

Child Safety

Expanded Protections for Children

www.apple.com

 

[dk001]

Huh? You claimed



Neither of the links you provided above said anything about how long it takes for law enforcement to respond to NCMEC reports.

Then you need to specify what portion of my post you wanted sourcing on.
Keep in mind that "modern" information is hard to come by for the US.

As I look that up, here is a couple of great reads on the difficulty on investigating these.

 

[dk001]

It's actually neither. First of all, the Fourth Amendment doesn't even apply to your personal use of an operating system / cloud service (both of which are things you agree to do so in a manner consistent with their policies). That's between you and the government. Secondly, on-device scanning is completely more private than Apple decrypting and scanning all your photos on their server. Apple has no access to on-device processes and that information is not sent to Apple unless there's a CSAM match.

This has not been legally challenged yet. It is one of the aspects brought up when Apple first announced this.

 

[usagora]

Then you need to specify what portion of my post you wanted sourcing on.

I did:

 

[usagora]

This has not been legally challenged yet. It is one of the aspects brought up when Apple first announced this.

Then let due process run its course. I find it hard to believe that cases arising from people getting caught uploading CSAM to iCloud are going to be thrown out of court, but we'll see.

 

[TheLocNar]

To everyone that voted yes, where you going? Android already does this. 😂

 

[PBz]

If an LEO approaches you in public and demands to search your phone without probable cause or a warrant, then the 4th Amendment applies. Do you see the difference? Apple is not a government agency - they're a private entity that is licensing the use of their mobile operating system to you, and you agree to abide by their rules to use both it and their cloud service. Everything is in writing and legal.



They ARE proactively scanning your phone, but they are blind to that process - it's all happening on your end via software. The ONLY time Apple is allowed to see any scan results is once 30+ illegal images are uploaded, and that data is only about those specific images. They have explained this on their website from the start:

View attachment 1840519

Child Safety

Expanded Protections for Children

www.apple.com

We understand that the TOS will have to be updated. That is the point of this thread. Some of us will not use/upgrade/update when those TOS are applied.

 

[usagora]

We understand that the TOS will have to be updated. That is the point of this thread. Some of us will not use/upgrade/update when those TOS are applied.

Whatever floats your boat - just don't pretend it's a Fourth Amendment issue, because it's not.

 

[dk001]

I did:

View attachment 1840527

Now take a step back and think about this.
If this is a user of CSAM and the NCMEC gets reports, I think their threshold is 5, it is turned over to LE who determines if it is State or FBI. That should be a quick one if all the info is available. Using the information to go after the creator of CSAM, can take a long time especially if it crosses country borders.

As I find specific data I'll update here.

On a side note, how long do you think these investigations take?

 

[PBz]

Whatever floats your boat - just don't pretend it's a Fourth Amendment issue, because it's not.

Prove to us that scanning our device (not the cloud) is not a violation of the 4th. I don't owe you proof. Today, police cannot search my phone without a warrant, for anything.. hash, photo, location, texts.. YOU tell us how this isn't protected by the 4th.