@scottalanmiller said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

@carnival-boy said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

But the software doesn't have the ability. We're going round in circles.

But it does, Apple themselves said that it does. It scans the whole device looking for whatever third party non-profits (and the government) tell it to search for. They could not possibly be more up front and clear about that. They aren't hiding this. You're claims don't seem to be that Apple won't do something bad, but that Apple is lying to make itself look bad. Why are you taking a stance that Apple is a good company, but lying? It's a very weird position to take without any reason to do so.

You are saying that the government could force Apple to provide them with data held on my phone. Apple can't do this, they don't have access to the data that this software gets and holds privately on my phone. The scan results are private (until uploaded to iCloud). Apple simply don't have the means to access the scan results.

That's my last post on this, I can't discuss with someone who just calls me weird.

But the software doesn't have the ability. We're going round in circles.

@scottalanmiller said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

@carnival-boy said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

And the Apple link clearly says it isn't doing what the article initially says will happen.

Actually Apple's link completely confirms the concerns. Not sure what you read, but you missed Apple's statements.

"Instead of scanning images in the cloud, the system performs on-device matching using a database"

You were claiming that they only scanned cloud, but Apple says the exactly opposite, twice.

No I wasn't. I said that the scanning was done on the phone, but that Apple can't access this data. The data is private until it us uploaded to the cloud.

On the other hand, if what I am implying is true.....

And the Apple link clearly says it isn't doing what the article initially says will happen.

@marcinozga said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

Again, read the article. You will get the software on the phone in iOS 15, and it will phone home. And unless you cut off internet access completely, there's not a thing you can do about it.

Which bits. I don't find the article that clear. It initially suggests the data is uploaded automatically from the phone, but ends with these statements which clearly say it is only photos that are uploaded to iCloud that are affected:

Apple’s neuralMatch algorithm will continuously scan photos that are stored on a US user’s iPhone and have also been uploaded to its iCloud back-up system

According to people briefed on the plans, every photo uploaded to iCloud in the US will be given a “safety voucher” saying whether it is suspect or not. Once a certain number of photos are marked as suspect, Apple will enable all the suspect photos to be decrypted and, if apparently illegal, passed on to the relevant authorities.

The article is also based on speculation and they haven't got Apple to comment.

I don't think so. I don't think Apple are too bad with privacy since their business model is still based on selling hardware rather than selling data. I trust them more than others.

If you don't use iCloud I don't think you have anything to be concerned about. They cannot access your phone.

@marcinozga said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:
And said software will upload results to Apple without your consent. And it just goes downhill from there.

I don't think it will.

@jasgot said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

The issue is that they are looking at your data stored on your device. This is where the line gets crossed.

No they're not, unless I've misunderstood. Apple are not looking my phone. The data is private until I upload it to iCloud. My phone is analysing the data, but my phone and Apple are not the same thing.

@marcinozga said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

The difference is you don't have to upload the photos to the cloud. You could also encrypt them before uploading. Now your photos will always be scanned on YOUR device.

Scanned, but the info is private. Apple explicitly don't have access to the data until it is uploaded to iCloud. That's my point.

Fundamentally, I don't understand why you think there is such a big difference between scanning a photo in the cloud, and scanning one on a device - in both cases the photo is getting scanned.

@scottalanmiller said in Apple plans to scan your images for child porn:

We just have to trust them on that, if that's even what they are saying. The concern is that they are putting something on your device that scans your data (any data, it has to scan everything to look for one thing) and then sometimes reports what it finds to the government.

So the concern is about Apple doing something that they have explicitly said they won't do rather than any concerns about what they are actually saying they are doing. You could get tinhat with every tech company in that case.

Then don't use iCloud. iCloud has been doing this for years and no-one has complained?

If I understand it correctly, it's still only notifying anyone when it is uploaded to iCloud. It's really just moving the processing of the images from iCloud servers to local devices, but the end result is the same. I'm not sure this is an issue.

I didn't get the impression from the OP that they were use SQL Server - less than 500 lines of code.

Not sure they're generally valid reasons. All systems require time and effort for upgrades, new versions etc etc.

Most companies already have Access licences as part of their Microsoft 365 account.

However, I see that Access doesn't run on a Mac which sounds like a showstopper.

Why not use Access?

I think just blaming IT departments is harsh. I know from back when I was running IT departments that there is constant pushback from users whenever security was tightened or new policies rolled out and it is critical to make clear that security is something being pushed from the very top and not from IT. In many companies, senior executives will actively undermine IT when it comes to security - that shouldn't happen.

It's important that when a senior executive moans to the CEO that IT are making his or her life difficult the reaction is "suck it up" and not "I'll have a word and see what I can do to make you an exception".

There were little things that I did like when a memo went out on a new policy I made it sure it came from the CFO and not from IT so (a) people took it seriously and (b) IT didn't get the pushback from necessary but unpopular polices.

There needs to be a culture of "IT are making your data safe" and not "IT are making your life difficult".

I've always found the concept of computers telling me what the weather currently is when I can simply look out of the window really wierd.

The other weird thing is still having weather reports on TV during news programmes. Who doesn't just look up the weather on their phone these days? Who wants to watch a weatherman standing in front of a green screen with a map of the country displayed? Maybe it's more relevant in the US where you have extreme and dangerous weather, but here in the UK we're basically getting told whether there is going to be a bit of light rain later or some snow on the very top of a mountain in Scotland, several hundred miles away from where I actually live.

All I ever really need to know is, I'm walking to a bar soon, do I need to take a coat in case it rains when I walk home?

@pmoncho said in I can't even:

From a marketing perspective, my issue with the email is the perceived bonus you get for having an UNLIMITED account (I have one too). We are not getting any bonus for free, its included in the word Unlimited, at least according to the Oxford Dictionary.

What does the Oxford Dictionary say? The word unlimited doesn't imply anything regarding audio quality.