|
|
|
|
|
by alpaca128
1775 days ago
|
|
> Hash collisions would fail human review You mean like the absolutely perfect human review of appstore content that's known for both false positives and false negatives? Neither automatic nor manual (human) review works 100% reliably. And believing otherwise will only ruin lives. |
|
I would like to believe though that for this system to fully fail an innocent person, the following would all need to have failed:
1) Coincidental CSAM hash collision 2) Incorrect manual review by Apple 3) Incorrect subsequent review by NCMEC 4) Inability of a lawyer to obtain the original image for presentation during a trial/appeal
which seems kind of unlikely? (although it's certainly the case that once steps 1, 2 and 3 have failed, the person's reputation is likely damaged even if they are able to prove their innocence in court).
The wider question here is, should 100% accuracy be the bar by which we judge this? I don't think we expect the law enforcement system to be 100% right, hence principles like the presumption of innocence and right to appeal, and even then it gets things wrong sometimes.