|
|
|
|
|
|
by vineyardmike
1755 days ago
|
|
|
The point is that its done on our end, not apple's end. Many reasons this is bad. Obviously the "Slippery slope" argument around it scanning more in future and being abused by the state. There is the possibility that its exploited/bug that sends data when it shouldn't or falsely reports you (not a collision). Eg. a bug that reports all photos as bad instead of listening to results of scan. Obviously the possibility of collision sucks. But thats somewhat constant across implementation options. It wastes your CPU resources and network resources to do something that only benefits apple. It's a bad precedent because other companies will likely do this now, repeated the above arguments with increasingly less trustworthy companies. |
|
|
It seems that this system might be extremly resistant for collision to prevent them ending up to human review.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28305946
> It wastes your CPU resources and network resources to do something that only benefits apple
Okay, how practical is this problem? iCloud already scans your files to know whether they are need to be synced. And this scan applies lesser times, only once before upload per file.
Encryption does not mess with the filesize, so we are talking about few bytes of extra metadata per image here. Regular image with raw format is tens of megabytes.