wow, you seem to be misinformed. The reporting only happens on iCloud not on your device.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
With on-device CSAM scanning coming to MacOS 12, do you still trust your Mac?
- Thread starter Hessel89
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let me say it like it is: Apple can install and activate whatever system they want with every software update.
So can Google, so can Microsoft, so can Amazon and so can Facebook on their platforms these companies can install whatever they want on their platforms.
This is not restricted just to Apple platforms.
I think of pedophiles as sad broken men who sit in dark rooms masturbating over the power they have in abusing defenceless, young, vulnerable children, not as a collective who are striving to bring down a tech company.
In some strange way the thought of my beautiful pictures of my children sitting on the same hard drive sector as a CSAM image makes me feel angry.
If you ever did then there is your issue to begin with.
Take a look at how much of a percentage use linux as a server os, 90%+.
Take a look at how much of a percentage use linux as a desktop, <%5.
So yes, linux is a server os, with some hobbyists and programmers who are the 5%.
Linux isn't used in 95% of business environments.
In business environments you need to be able to work in teams and share file formats between them. And linux is an absolute joke concerning that, unless the only thing you do is browse and type text.
Last edited by a moderator:
lol, you should read what you just said -- no, they don't scan on your device, but yes, it does and uploads it to apple...
You're forgetting something, Apple has already ticked off people enough for them to not buy Apple products and they will eventually wander away because the Apple universe doesn't matter to them anymore. Apple's got to cancel this with big fanfare and then wait a long time to get what they've lost back.
No, you are the one who's misinformed. The fact that the CSAM scanner is designed to run on end-users' devices is the objection.
Referring to Linux as "a server OS" implies it's suitable only for server use. That is clearly false, as demonstrated by the many people who use it on desktops and laptops. Calling Linux "a server OS" is as inaccurate as calling MS-Windows "a desktop OS" because it's used more on desktops and laptops than in servers.
That will come as news to my co-workers that used it in a business environment.
Again: That will come as a surprise to my co-workers that used it in a business environment. Including me, who used to use it in a business environment.
Sure:
The generation of the descriptors is based on a CNN, which is part of deep learning, which is a subset of machine learning, which is a subset of artificial intelligence. That’s how Apple is generating hashes on device and also how NCMEC is generating the hashes used for matching, as Apple has no access to the original known images. They are using the same algorithm from Apple, otherwise no valid matches could be made.
You are still applying a blanket assumption on what Linux does and where it is used. That 95% of business environments? I’m a Linux sysadmin, who has worked in both private sector and government jobs. I can guarantee you that more than that 95% use Linux in their business environment. Because you don’t see it at the desktop level does not mean it isn’t used.
the perspective being presented here is horribly skewed because of what you are seeing, and not what lies under. In this case, seeing isn’t believing.
BL.
Until Apple gives me a reason not to trust them, then I have no reason not to. First of all, I don't use iCloud for anything other than Contacts, Messages, Calendar, Reminders, and Notes, so this change doesn't even affect me. But even if I did use iCloud for photos, I would have absolutely no problem with CSAM scanning going on. As Apple has clearly explained, they won't even see any of that scanning data unless you upload 30+ illegal images to their servers, and then all they see is the info on those images. So unless you're involved in this illegal activity, Apple won't know anything more about you post macOS12/iOS15 than they did before. And has also been explained before, once you put anything on someone else's server (iCloud, OneDrive, etc.), you are sacrificing your privacy to the company that owns those servers. This has always been the case.
The only people who are getting upset are those who don't understand how this works or are giving into irrational paranoia, fueled by them believing everything they read from fear-mongering bloggers, etc.
The only people who are getting upset are those who don't understand how this works or are giving into irrational paranoia, fueled by them believing everything they read from fear-mongering bloggers, etc.
Doubtful, many researchers in this or similar fields including those with PhDs and/or professorships who do independent research and have also consulted for authorities and governments (including myself), see this very critical. A former colleague, who is a network and security specialist often tasked with securing forensic digital evidence in CSAM cases has the same opinion and he is much closer to this crap than most.
The argument “you don’t understand it” often comes from those that are not experts in the field, trying to disqualify other opinions. I get this a lot from my students “I got it right, I deserve a better grade, you just didn’t understand what I wrote”.
And you don't think Apple employs or contracts knowledgeable people in the field to implement this technology and advise them on it? smh... You do realize "experts" often disagree, right? Also notice I said "getting upset" not simply "have some concerns." There's a difference. One is irrational paranoia, the other is reasonable.
Nope. It's a simple fact that many here don't understand it. For instance, many people are still under the impression that the scan is taking place even if they don't have iCloud for photos enabled. Others think that Apple is actively looking at your phone because they hear the word "scan" and get these mental images of lists of files being spit out to prying eyes, etc.
Apples concern is simple, get the technology out to the market. No one is paid to have concerns over this. Apple also implemented a way for certain processes to bypass the user network stack, so users couldn't block apps from talking back to Apple, leave alone for external firewalls. People had the same doubts about the technology, yet Apple did it. They backpaddled after it became public and removed Apps from the whitelist, but it's still there but inactive at the moment.
In a similar way, government agencies are paid to spy on their own citizens and military personal is paid to bomb targets with collateral damage (civilians). Anyone who has concerns over this and works for Apple has the wrong job. But maybe they need the job, so they should up and just do it. The only ones who are credible on this are independent as it is often the case.
BS. Aside from the fact that they designed this system so carefully as to make it as private as possible, did you not see the article on this site today about them delaying the deployment of this technology to be sure they get it right, amid concerns people have expressed?
You can't credibly assert this with any certainty unless you have insider knowledge.
That's what's called damage control. People have spoken up and Apple listen (to financial loss). Every company would do it this way. Out of our local research groups and the people I've spoken to, not a single person is willing to put more money into Apple at this point, except for buying "one of each" for research purposes (for various reasons). That's of course only a handful of research institutes locally, but a 6-7 figure sales for Apple they're missing out on every year. We'll see what happens, once this is out.
So yes. And no, I'm not working at Apple. I have worked with Apple in the late PPC / early Intel days and still know a few people there from visits and projects. Not everyone is happy about this and that's not unusual, in any company. The same can be said for Microsoft, Google and Facebook.
Sorry, but it can't be both. You either have certain knowledge Apple did not solicit input as to whether there should be concerns related to their proposed solution, or you do not.
When companies are as big as Apple, someone's always upset at something they're doing. But in any case, by your own admission here, people ARE paid to be concerned about it, which you said they weren't. If they weren't concerned, they'd just bulldoze over concerns and implement the technology without delay.
It seems no matter what Apple does here, you have a negative spin on it. Pretty much a "damned if they do; damned if they don't" philosophy.
So yes, I have knowledge about it from people working at Apple.
And no, I personally am not an Apple employee (I teach and research at a university), but I've been told so by people working at Apple.
If that qualifies as "insider knowledge" is up to you.
Does the MacOS CSAM scan have any distinct differences/concerns compared to the iOS implementation, or is it still limited to iCloud Photo Library? Some people are making it sound like they're going to be scanning entire hard drives but I can't find any evidence of that (that also sounds like it'd take up exponentially more system resources).
We have no idea wrt resource consumption. That is one of the many unanswered questions. I can tell you hashing is computationally expensive.
As for Linux being "only" a server OS, and not used in business...
As others point out, Linux can be used on the desktop. I do it. And if standards for business desktop use are what matters, one would probably choose Windows over any other OS.
Apple is more accepted now, of course--but I can easily recall when the Mac was considered a toy, or suitable only for certain limited uses (like graphics), etc.
Hmmm...when I hear something like "no one uses Linux" I'm reminded of when I heard those words applied to the Mac!
Admittedly, Linux can be limiting, due to available software. But I'm getting by fine, and so do many others. And if my particular needs change, well, I can adapt. As things stand now, I can't see going back to Apple as my one and only computer--but I could see having a second Mac system in daily use for production work that I can't do or can't do conveniently on Linux.
As others point out, Linux can be used on the desktop. I do it. And if standards for business desktop use are what matters, one would probably choose Windows over any other OS.
Apple is more accepted now, of course--but I can easily recall when the Mac was considered a toy, or suitable only for certain limited uses (like graphics), etc.
Hmmm...when I hear something like "no one uses Linux" I'm reminded of when I heard those words applied to the Mac!
Admittedly, Linux can be limiting, due to available software. But I'm getting by fine, and so do many others. And if my particular needs change, well, I can adapt. As things stand now, I can't see going back to Apple as my one and only computer--but I could see having a second Mac system in daily use for production work that I can't do or can't do conveniently on Linux.