Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms
Date: 24 Jul 2024 21:30:33 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <lgda3pF3c6aU2@mid.individual.net>
References: <v7mup4$7vpf$1@solani.org> <lg8ea1Fa94U1@mid.individual.net>
 <xn0oonlp4azqw16000@reader443.eternal-september.org>
 <lga2k1F7uk8U1@mid.individual.net>
 <xn0oonrftb7hazk002@reader443.eternal-september.org>
 <v7olut$19iie$1@dont-email.me> <lga8vfF8qq0U3@mid.individual.net>
 <v7q9vj$1l9co$1@dont-email.me> <lgclvsFbd6U3@mid.individual.net>
 <v7rb0i$1qjdv$5@dont-email.me>
X-Trace: individual.net 56tG9sJVLBsTrqEU17/eHAgEmRG3eW1rIjqZVR9TA2qakMYy9V
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MzzQ5h6rCoTl4ZFbTpBnomGoV/E= sha256:Qufl0zlo9109BhVizvcWV0r0BQn8jefbFHiE7XS+TkA=
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1<n@LQ!aZ7vLO_nWbK~@T'XIS0,oAJcU.qLM
 dk/j8Udo?O"o9B9Jyx+ez2:B<nx(k3EdHnTvB]'eoVaR495,Rv~/vPa[e^JI+^h5Zk*i`Q;ezqDW<
 ZFs6kmAJWZjOH\8[$$7jm,Ogw3C_%QM'|H6nygNGhhl+@}n30Nz(^vWo@h>Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e
 up1/bO{=-)
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Darwin)
Bytes: 2570

On 2024-07-24, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-24 08:47, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2024-07-24, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> True. Unlike others, Apple's proposal was to only scan images on
>>>> device that were being uploaded to Apple's servers, and only match
>>>> hashes of them to a database of hashes matching known CSAM images.
>>>> And only after multiple matches reached a threshold would Apple
>>>> investigate further.
>>>
>>> All correct.
>>>
>>>> Yet even with those precautions, there was still a realistic chance
>>>> of false positives
>>>
>>> The rate was deterministic and tunable.
>> 
>> If the rate was anything other than ZERO, them people's privacy was
>> at risk.
>
> By that argument, we must also scrap the traditional system of issuing
> warrants to search people's homes, because there is a non-zero rate of
> warrants issued in error.

Nah. Most warrants meet probable cause standards before a judge will
sign them. CSAM scanning requires no such due process. They are nowhere
near the same thing.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR