Today, Apple has published a document that describes the security threat model revision system included in their new child safety features. Apple clarified the different layers of safety and tracks with which their new child safety system works. Clarification today was part of a series of Apple discussions had as a result of the announcement of their new characteristics of child safety – and the inevitable controversy that followed.
There are two parts of this enlarged protective system for children: one involving family sharing accounts and messages, the other dealing with iCloud photos. The message system requires a parent or tutor account enable the functionality to work. This is an opt-in system.
Family sharing with messages
With family sharing, a parent or guardian account can opt for a feature that can detect sexually explicit images. This system only uses a device learning classifier on the Messages application to check the photos sent by and a given child device.
This feature does not share data with Apple. Specifically, “Apple wins any knowledge of any user’s communications with this functionality activated and wins any knowledge of children’s actions or parental notifications.”
The child’s device analyzes photos sent to or from their device with the Apple Messages application. The analysis is performed on the device (offline). If a sexually explicit photo is detected, it will not be visible to the child and the child will have the opportunity to attempt to proceed with the image – how much the parent account will be notified.
If the child confirms his wish to see the image, said image will be preserved on the child’s device up to a moment when the parent can confirm the contents of the photo. The photo is recorded by the security function and can not be deleted by the child without the consent of the parent (via parental access of the physical device.)
CSAM detection with iCloud
The second feature works specifically with images stored on Apple servers in iCloud photo libraries. CSAM detection can potentially detect CSAM images and, if enough CSAM images are detected, the data will be sent to Apple for human verification. If the Apple’s human verification system confirms that CSAM hardware is present, the incriminated account will be arrested and the appropriate judicial authorities will be contacted.
Apple will detect CSAM imaging in the first part of this process using known CSAM hash databases. The CSAM hash databases include a set of detection parameters created by organizations whose job is to use known CSAM images to create said sets of parameters.
Apple suggested this afternoon that each check is carried out with haveds that intersect between two or more children’s security organizations. This means that the organization of child safety can add a parameter (hash, here) that could define the process to check the non-CSAM material.
Apple also ensures that any perceptual hash in several Hash lists organizations in a single sovereign jurisdiction (but not others), are rejected. In this way, there is no way for a single country to compel several organizations to include haubans for non-CSAM materials (for example, photos of anti-citizencation symbols or activities).
Apple suggests that the chances of a photo has been falsely identified as CSAM at this stage of the process is a billion dollars.
At this point, Apple still has no access to the data analyzed by their system. Only once a single person account meets a threshold of 30 images marked that the system shares data with Apple for further consideration.
But – before that, there is a second independent perceptual hash to check the more than 30 flag images. If the secondary verification confirms this second check, the data is shared with Apple Human Reiformers for final confirmation.
By Apple’s documentation today, “Apple will refuse all requests to add non-CSAM images to the perceptual CSAM hash database” and “Apple will also refuse all requests to express human examiners to file reports for any other than CSAM documents for accounts. Which exceed the correspondence threshold. “
If a human critique in Apple confirms that an account has CSAM documents, they will report to the competent authorities. In the United States, this authority is the national center of missing and exploited children (NCMEC).
Stay informed, in any case
The Apple Photo ICLOUD documentation The part of this child safety system indicates that perceptual controls are only performed on their cloud storage pipeline for downloaded images on iCloud photos. Apple confirmed that this system “can not act on any other image content on the device”. The documentation also confirms that “on devices and accounts where ICLOUD photos are disabled, no image is absolutely deposited.
The perceptual message control system also remains on the device, locally. The message family sharing system of the messages is done using the child’s own hardware and no server in Apple. No information on this check system is shared with someone else than the child and the parent – and even at that time, the parent must physically access the child’s device to see The potentially incroverol material.
Whatever the level of security of apple contours and Apple promises done on what will be scanned and reported, and who you are right to want to know everything there is to know about this situation. Whenever you see a company using a system with which user-generated content is scanned, for any reason, you are right to know how and why.
Given what we understand so far on this system, there is good news, depending on your view. If you want to avoid Apple Apple using some kind of verification of your photos, it seems likely that you can do it – assume that you are ready to avoid iCloud photos and you do not use messages to send photos to children Parents ask them to be registered with a family sharing account.
If you hope it will lead to Apple helping to stop the predators of sharing CSAM materials, it seems possible that it can happen. It will really really only be offenders for any reason do not know how to disable their iCloud photo account … but always. It could be a major step in the right di