[joe_the_user]

"...but you should be aware that "similar" to the network need not mean "similar" to a human..."

EXCEPT... neural hash also claims to be robust to modifications to images that would result in a similar-to-human-image. If the 96 bits is enough to tag such similar-to-humans results, why couldn't a brute force approach yield such similar-to-humans images? Indeed, a nefarious person intent on producing CSAM could set-up something like a generational-adversarial system that the produced CSAM images using the hashes along with other clues.

[user-the-name]

Because there are still an absolutely overwhelmingly huge number of different, completely nonsensical images that all generate the same hash, and small perturbations of those nonsensical blobs also generate the same hash.

96 bit is just not enough data to generate anything meaningful, just give up on that thought.