Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gambiting 1767 days ago
That's even worse - so now apple is deciding whether to report something even if it matches the data provided by the government. It's not their role to judge the contents, only whether the match is correct or not, otherwise even with actual CSAM content, are they going to be making judgement calls? What if the system matches loli content which I imagine is in that database but legal in places? Are they going to then get the user's location(!!!!) To see whether it's legal there or not, or....guess? Or what? Because the only way to make this system work is to report every match and then let actual law enforcement figure out if it's illegal or not.

So yeah, the entire system is fucked and shouldn't exist. Apple is not law enforcement and them saying "we'll just prescreen every submission" is actually worse, not better.
1 comments
tzs 1767 days ago
> It's not their role to judge the contents, only whether the match is correct or not.

Which is what they would be doing.

Some government gives Apple a purported CSAM hash database, which Apple only accepts because it is a CSAM database. An image gets a match. Apple looks at it and it is not CSAM. Therefore, unless the government lied to them about the database, it must be a false positive and gets rejected as an incorrect match.

The rejection is not because Apple judged the content per se. They just determined that it must be a false positive given the government's claims about the database.

link
gambiting 1767 days ago
My point was, what if you have content in there that is CSAM in some places but isn't in others(for instance - drawings). If apple employees report it to authorities in a state where it isn't illegal, they just suspended your account and reported you to authorities without any reason. So like I said, then you get into this trap of - do apple employees start judging whether the match "should" count? What if a picture isn't actually pornographic but made it into the database(say a child in underwear, maybe it's there because of a connection to an abuse case, but it isn't a picture of abuse per se). Again, is this random person at apple going to be making judgement calls about validity of matches against a government provided database? Because again, I don't believe this can ever work. Maybe those are edge cases, sure, but my point is that as soon as you allow some apple employee to make a judgement, you are introducing new risks.
link
alwillis 1767 days ago
My point was, what if you have content in there that is CSAM in some places but isn't in others(for instance - drawings). If apple employees report it to authorities in a state where it isn't illegal, they just suspended your account and reported you to authorities without any reason.

The only CSAM Apple will flag has to come from multiple organizations in different jurisdictions; otherwise, those hashes are ignored.

And since no credible child welfare organization is going to have CSAM that matches stuff from the worst places, there's no simple or obvious way to get them to match.

link
gambiting 1767 days ago
>>The only CSAM Apple will flag has to come from multiple organizations in different jurisdictions; otherwise, those hashes are ignored.

Have they actually said they would do that? I was under the impression that they just use the database of hashes provided by the American authority on prevention of child abuse.

>>And since no credible child welfare organization is going to have CSAM that matches stuff from the worst places

I'm not sure I understand what you mean, can you expand?

link
zimpenfish 1767 days ago
> Have they actually said they would do that?

In [1], "That includes a rule to only flag images found in multiple child safety databases with different government affiliations — theoretically stopping one country from adding non-CSAM content to the system."

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/13/22623859/apple-icloud-pho...

link