Re: Apple accused of underreporting suspected CSAM on its platforms

On 2024-07-24, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

On 2024-07-24 08:47, Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2024-07-24, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>
True. Unlike others, Apple's proposal was to only scan images on
device that were being uploaded to Apple's servers, and only match
hashes of them to a database of hashes matching known CSAM images.
And only after multiple matches reached a threshold would Apple
investigate further.

>
All correct.
>

Yet even with those precautions, there was still a realistic chance
of false positives

>
The rate was deterministic and tunable.

 
If the rate was anything other than ZERO, them people's privacy was
at risk.

>
By that argument, we must also scrap the traditional system of issuing
warrants to search people's homes, because there is a non-zero rate of
warrants issued in error.

Nah. Most warrants meet probable cause standards before a judge will
sign them. CSAM scanning requires no such due process. They are nowhere
near the same thing.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR