news.volyx.in

Apple Regrets Confusion over 'iPhone Scanning' (bbc.com)

585 points by belter · 1868 days ago · 734 comments on HN

Article summary

Apple has introduced new tools to detect child sexual abuse material on iPhones and iPads, which will scan images before they are uploaded to iCloud. The company has faced criticism from privacy groups, who argue that the technology could be used by authoritarian governments to spy on citizens. Apple's software chief has acknowledged that the announcement was 'jumbled pretty badly' and has sought to clarify how the tools work. The tools are due to be added to new versions of iOS and iPadOS later this year.

Main themes

  • Child protection
  • Privacy concerns
  • Government surveillance
  • Technological safeguards
  • False positives
  • Slippery slope

What commenters say

  • The introduction of these tools is a necessary step to protect children from abuse, but it raises concerns about privacy and potential misuse.
  • The technology is not foolproof and could lead to false positives, which could have serious consequences for innocent users.
  • The fact that Apple is scanning images on devices before they are uploaded to iCloud is a significant change from their previous approach, and it is not clear how this will be implemented or what safeguards will be in place.
  • Some commenters believe that the feature could be easily extended to scan all files on a device, not just those uploaded to iCloud, which would be a significant invasion of privacy.
  • Others argue that the feature is a necessary evil, and that it is better to have the scanning done on the device rather than on Apple's servers.
  • There are concerns that the feature could be used by governments to spy on citizens, and that it could be used to suppress dissent or opposition.
  • The implementation of this feature is seen as a slippery slope, where once the capability is in place, it can be easily repurposed for other uses.
  • Some commenters are skeptical of Apple's claims that the feature is secure and that false positives are unlikely, and argue that the company has not provided enough information about how the feature works or what safeguards are in place.