In message <160920211427388492%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <al56vbi12fdr$.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
> <ron@null.invalid> wrote:

>> > multiple governments would need to conspire against the same images
>> > (good luck getting multiple governments to agree on anything) *and* get
>> > the manual review team to go along with it.
>>
>> Malware writers don't have to agree to anything to open these back doors.

> what part of there is no backdoor is not clear?

> read the white papers on how it actually works and why there is no
> backdoor.

HE CAN'T READ! All those words, some of them are SIX LETTERS LONG! Some
are even longer!

--
Never age. Never die. Live for ever in that one last white-hot
moment, when the crowd screamed. When every note was a heartbeat.
Burn across the sky. You will never grow old. They will never say
you died. --Soul Music

In message <rhm05wy47vuc.dlg@news.solani.org> RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, Lewis wrote
> (in article<news:slrnska16n.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
>>> Governments & malware writers are probably still working on expanding the
>>> back doors
>>
>> You have no clue what you are talking about.

> How can you still be unaware of everything the security experts have said?

YOU have no clue what YOU are talking about.

>> You have decided to cloak
>> yourself in ignorance and refuse to do anything but spew the same
>> ignorant misinformed and completely wrong information over and over.

> How can you still be unaware what a hundred privacy organizations have said?

YOU have no clue what YOU are talking about.

>>> Apple said they always follow the law in every country they sell phones.
>>
>> And as you have been asked over and over again, which law are you
>> talking about? An imaginary law?

> How can you still be unaware Tim Cook said Apple follows all local laws?

YOU have no clue what YOU are talking about.

>> You are aware that CSAM scanning is already being done by all hosts,
>> right? Apple has been the outlier because they wanted a system that
>> preserves privacy, but we have these anti-privacy cunts screaming about
>> how bad Apple's system is.

> Why is it that it's only you who is unaware of Apple's broken promises?

YOU have no clue what YOU are talking about.

>> It's very simple, if you think scanning photos on the server is "better"
>> you are an advocate for no-privacy.

> Are you still unaware Apple acted as an active branch of local authorities?

YOU have no clue what YOU are talking about.

--
I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather did, not screaming in
terror like his passengers.

In message <3h68kg6uvwxt$.dlg@news.solani.org> RonTheGuy <ron@null.invalid> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2021, Lewis wrote
> (in article<news:slrnsk8fik.2j62.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
>> If you are concerned about your kiddie porn, turn off iCloud photos.

> How does anything you do stop malevolent governments & malware writers?
>
>> Because of idiots like you and irresponsible "journalists" and
>> clickbait sites we may well end up with a much worse and much less
>> secure system. Thanks, dumbshits. You all suck.

> Why do you think everyone who cares about privacy is a dumbshit who sucks?

You have made you opposition to privacy quite clear. You are an
anti-privacy kook.

--
'A man like that could inspire a handful of broken men to conquer a
country.' 'Fine. Just so long as he does it on his day off.'

Lewis <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> asked
>> I used to have automatic updates enabled on all my Apple devices
>> (iPhone, iPad, Watch). Now I'm a little more cautious. Just like you
>> should not buy a new device until a few months after it's released,
>
> Nonsense.

Apologists are supremely ignorant of almost everything, including updates.

Luckily iOS gives you the _choice_ to update the security of the iPhone when
and if you want to (all my iPads are left on the iOS they were born with).

Unfortunately, after Android 6 released, Android now updates _all_ Android
phones (from Android 6 & up) completely automatically (without asking!).

That means all Android phones from October 5, 2015 (six years ago!) have had
their security updated, automatically, without most users even knowing it!

While apologists are ignorant how even iOS is updated, they're certainly
completely ignorant of the fact Android updates almost the entire operating
system over the Google Play Services app (which released 10/5/2015).

Wilf <wilf@postingx.uk> asked
> I have to say that I don't normally wait before applying iOS updates
> and, so far, have never had a problem. Probably tempting fate now !!

Do any of these ignorant apologists know how awful iOS 13 & 14 were?

*Apple iOS 13 Is Full Of Bugs*
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2019/09/19/apple-ios13-upgrade-problems-iphone-11-pro-max-xs-max-xr-update>

What scares me is that people as ignorant as this Wilf... actually exist.
*Why is iOS 14 so bad?*
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-is-ios-14-so-bad/>

Who is _that_ stupid that they don't know the sordid history of iOS 13 & 14?
*Apple software engineer explains why iOS has so many bugs*
<https://iphonewired.com/news/5169/>

On Sep 18, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnskcllf.ot1.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
>> How can you still be so unaware of the real issue here with bad parents?
>
> Which is why the parental notification only exists for children who re
> 12yo and under.

Your reply shows you can repeat the Apple PR blitz but the question is how
can you (& Apple) still be unaware of what experts say the privacy issue is?

Do you know what the privacy issue is with iMessage scanning on the iPhone?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On Sep 18, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnskcm6v.ot1.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> You and the other troll morons are intentionally conflating two entire
> different things.

Which of those "entirely different things" is not scanning on the iPhone?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On Sep 18, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnskcmcd.ot1.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> HE CAN'T READ! All those words, some of them are SIX LETTERS LONG!
> Some are even longer!

At what time will you understand that Apple centric PR spin in Apple's white
papers isn't what matters to real privacy experts & privacy organizations?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On Sep 18, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnskcm1l.ot1.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> Back door has several criteria, not a singl one is matched by the CSAM
> system
> *) A hidden feature or bug
> *) Allow unauthorized access
> *) Allows surreptitious access
> *) allows accessing the data on the computer or device

When will you realize real privacy experts & privacy organizations have
shown all those criteria will happen by malevolent governments, parents,
& malware developers after Apple puts these two new back doors into billions
of iPhones around the world?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On Sep 18, 2021, Lewis wrote
(in article<news:slrnskcl7j.ot1.g.kreme@m1mini.local>):
> The EFF has become a fund-raising organization. They have consistently
> and repeatedly overstated and lied about numerous things in order to
> fearmonger to fill their coffers.

You have successfully negated everything the EFF has or will ever say.
Now how are you going to do that with the other 99 privacy organizations?

>> "All it would take to widen the narrow backdoor that Apple is building
>> is an expansion of the machine learning parameters to look for
>
> And there is the lie. Right there, in plain sight. They are
> intentionally and knowingly mixing up tow thing to mislead their readers
> into panic and donations to the EFF.

How is it you know more about privacy than a hundred privacy organizations?

Ron, the humblest guy in town.

On 2021-09-18, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/16/2021 1:49 PM, badgolferman wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> If they’re being uploaded to iCloud then check them there. No need to
>> check them on your private personal device and use up system
>> resources.
>
> We all know what the eventual outcome of all this is going to be.
> Apple will scan unencrypted files on their servers, which is what
> other companies, like Facebook, already do.

Nope. Apple wouldn't be going through all of this trouble if they wanted
to decrypt iCloud data on their servers.

> Apple can still use the CSAM hashes, but on their servers, not on
> users’ devices.i

You don't have any authority over Apple, dipshit troll.

> In a few months this whole debacle will fall out of the news cycle and
> dipshit trolls like me will have find a new chew toy.

Yep.

--
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

On 2021-09-18, Robin Goodfellow <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:
>
> Apple scares me

True.

--
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

In article <si5gmj$uk2$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> We all know what the eventual outcome of all this is going to be.

nobody outside of a very small group of people within apple know what
it will be.

you certainly do not.

> Apple
> will scan unencrypted files on their servers, which is what other
> companies, like Facebook, already do.

except that icloud is encrypted, so no.

wanting apple to do what facebook does is abhorrent.

> Apple can still use the CSAM hashes, but on their servers, not on users¹
> devices. They can state something like: ³our researchers invented a new
> way to scan for CSAM using our servers so we no longer have a need to
> scan on devices.²

it's not possible to scan server-side while maintaining user privacy, a
benefit even you said was important.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> except that icloud is encrypted, so no.

It's telling nospam is ignorant that Apple already scans uploaded photos.

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> asked
> True.

Adults will notice apologists like Jolly Roger own imaginary belief systems.

The _instant_ facts are presented (about iOS bugs), they turn into instant
kindergarten children.

Much like a fifth-grade bully told that Santa Claus is a marketing creation.
--
Every time Jolly Roger posts it's easy to see why he didn't graduate H.S.

In article <si6471$gnc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> Apple already scans uploaded photos.

they do not.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> Apple already scans uploaded photos.
>
> they do not.

How do you think Apple reports CSAM in your iCloud Mail attachments?

On 9/18/2021 7:26 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>>> Apple already scans uploaded photos.
>>
>> they do not.
>
> How do you think Apple reports CSAM in your iCloud Mail attachments?

Apple scans iCloud Mail attachments for CSAM, but they do not yet scan
iCloud Photos for CSAM. What we will likely see once the "delay" is
over, is server side scanning of photos for CSAM, using the hash
technique that they initially wanted to put on people's phones.

The usual way to detect CSAM is to scan uploaded photos. This is what
Google and Facebook already do, and what Apple is expected to do soon.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
>> How do you think Apple reports CSAM in your iCloud Mail attachments?
>
> Apple scans iCloud Mail attachments for CSAM, but they do not yet scan
> iCloud Photos for CSAM. What we will likely see once the "delay" is
> over, is server side scanning of photos for CSAM, using the hash
> technique that they initially wanted to put on people's phones.

The only iCloud data Apple can't routinely read are in the following areas:
Apple Card transactions
Home data
Health data
iCloud Keychain (saved accounts & passwords)
Maps Favorites, Collections, and search history
Memoji
Payment information
QuickType Keyboard learned vocabulary
Safari History and iCloud Tabs
Screen Time
Siri information (although temps in Ireland were listening)
Wi-Fi passwords
W1 and H1 Bluetooth keys for AirPods and Beats Headphones

Most of these weren't stored encrypted until later versions of iOS.
For example, Maps and Safari data are only encrypted in iOS 13+.
> The usual way to detect CSAM is to scan uploaded photos. This is what
> Google and Facebook already do, and what Apple is expected to do soon.

Does anyone notice conspicuously missing from that E2EE list above of what
Apple doesn't have the key for, based on Apple's own documents, are:
iMessages (in your iCloud Backup)
iCloud Photo Library

The lack of security for iMessages is because the end-to-end encryption key
for your Messages data is actually stored in your iCloud Backup. Only if you
disable iCloud Backups is a new key automatically generated (which only then
would make Messages in the Cloud more secure, but only if you leave iCloud
Backups permanently off).

Your iCloud Backups and your iCloud Photo Library are merely 'encrypted at
rest' which means that although they are stored on Apple's servers in a
generic encrypted form, Apple has full and complete access to that generic
encryption key which they can use for any purpose they want to use it for.
--
What's revealing is how little the apologists know of their own claims.

In article <si6857$fnu$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> The usual way to detect CSAM is to scan uploaded photos.

that's what apple was planning on doing.

> This is what
> Google and Facebook already do,

they scan on their servers, which violates user privacy, plus they scan
for much, much more than csam. not what apple wants.

> and what Apple is expected to do soon.

no.

In article <si6744$1i8u$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> >> Apple already scans uploaded photos.
> >
> > they do not.
>
> How do you think Apple reports CSAM in your iCloud Mail attachments?

icloud photos is not the same as email

On 9/18/2021 8:29 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:

<snip>

> Does anyone notice conspicuously missing from that E2EE list above of what
> Apple doesn't have the key for, based on Apple's own documents, are:
> iMessages (in your iCloud Backup)
> iCloud Photo Library

That is correct, but the same situation exists for other cloud storage.
Of course you're free to encrypt your photos, or anything else,
yourself, and upload the files to the cloud, without using Google Photos
or iCloud photos. Then Google or Apple won't have the key.

> The lack of security for iMessages is because the end-to-end encryption key
> for your Messages data is actually stored in your iCloud Backup. Only if you
> disable iCloud Backups is a new key automatically generated (which only then
> would make Messages in the Cloud more secure, but only if you leave iCloud
> Backups permanently off).
>
> Your iCloud Backups and your iCloud Photo Library are merely 'encrypted at
> rest' which means that although they are stored on Apple's servers in a
> generic encrypted form, Apple has full and complete access to that generic
> encryption key which they can use for any purpose they want to use it for.

That is correct. That is necessary in order for the cloud provider to be
able to scan your photo library.

It's likely that the NCMEC was upset that they were receiving so few
reports of CSAM from Apple (since Apple is not scanning iPhoto storage).
Instead of following the usual practice of scanning uploaded photos and
comparing them against a database of CSAM images, Apple decided that the
CSAM scanning should occur on users' phones. There are theories of why
they thought this was better, including reducing the load on their
servers, but no explanation from Apple why they could not follow the
lead of Google and Facebook and do server-side scanning. They didn't
think through the potential for abuse of the client side scanning.

In article <si6ck5$jb2$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> It's likely that the NCMEC was upset that they were receiving so few
> reports of CSAM from Apple (since Apple is not scanning iPhoto storage).

no.

> Instead of following the usual practice of scanning uploaded photos and
> comparing them against a database of CSAM images, Apple decided that the
> CSAM scanning should occur on users' phones.

for very good reasons, which have been explained many times.

> There are theories of why
> they thought this was better, including reducing the load on their
> servers,

that's a ridiculous conspiracy theory and you know it.

there's no need to guess why when it's quite obvious to anyone who read
about how it actually works (i.e., not you).

> but no explanation from Apple why they could not follow the
> lead of Google and Facebook and do server-side scanning

wrong. there was a very good explanation directly from apple.

> . They didn't
> think through the potential for abuse of the client side scanning.

wrong. it's designed so it is almost impossible to abuse.

you're trolling as usual.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> there was a very good explanation directly from apple.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies.*
It ceases to be shocking that you _believe_ all the bullshit from Apple.

The "you're holding it wrong" bullshit, and the "battery chemistry"
bullshit, and the lack of basic accessories "for the environment" bullshit
is all bullshit from Apple that only the ignorati could possibly believe.

Certainly privacy experts and organizations around the world didn't believe
Apple's bullshit because they know what the whole world knows about Apple.

*Nobody lies like Apple lies.*
--
The _only_ time Apple ever tells the truth is when forced to, in court.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> It's likely that the NCMEC was upset that they were receiving so few
> reports of CSAM from Apple (since Apple is not scanning iPhoto storage).

Knowing full well the only time Apple ever tells the truth is when they're
forced to, in court, we may never know what Apple was thinking they'd gain
with this stupid idea of scanning iMessages and photos on your iPhone.

All we know is a hundred privacy organizations and many privacy experts
around the world have criticized Apple for what is clearly a dumb move.

Given Apple does everything purely for profit and for no other reason
(nothing wrong with that - we just need to understand that is Apple's only
motive - but Apple tries to hide that fact - which is why Apple is caught
lying so much to the public)...

....If we ever do figure out what Apple's real intent was, we should let
everyone know, but for now, I suspect it was similar in intent when Cuomo
teamed up with AOL & AT&T to kill their nntp servers (for the kiddies).

*Cuomo: AT&T and AOL block child porn newsgroups*
<https://www.smh.com.au/technology/cuomo-att-and-aol-block-child-porn-newsgroups-20080711-3dlc.html>

*More ISPs agree to cut off Usenet in response to Cuomo pressure*
<https://techcrunch.com/2008/07/12/more-ny-isps-agree-to-cut-off-usenet-access-in-response-to-pressure-from-attorney-general/>

*Cuomo: AT&T and AOL block newsgroups and sites*
<https://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/andrew-cuomo-t-aol-block-child-porn-newsgroups-sites-article-1.347677>

*ISPs to Board Up Big Chunk of Usenet in Child Porn Crusade*
<https://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/63782.html>

*AT&T Closes its Remaining Usenet Access*
<https://www.tomsguide.com/us/AT-T-Usenet-Access-Closed,news-4055.html>

*N.Y. AG says AOL will curb access to Usenet.*
<https://www.cnet.com/news/n-y-ag-says-aol-will-curb-access-to-usenet-it-already-did/>

Luckily that stopped child porn dead in its tracks, those clever politicians
like Cuomo and those clever businesspeople running AT&T and AOL.
--
The main problem with the apologists is they don't own independent thought.