137
submitted 2 months ago by misk@sopuli.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 98 points 2 months ago

Doesn't instagram claim messages are e2e encrypted? How can this work without them having access to all messages?

[-] atocci@lemmy.world 55 points 2 months ago

On device image recognition?

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 months ago
[-] Star@sopuli.xyz 31 points 2 months ago

They aren't E2EE by default. You have to enable it manually.

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 15 points 2 months ago

Ah okay, thanks, I don't use Instagram.

[-] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 8 points 2 months ago

It is all closed-source anyway, so would not count on this "e2e".

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

End to end is exactly what it says. It's decrypted at both ends.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] RmDebArc_5@lemmy.ml 69 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

One question. If they know those are minors and that they know that the pictures are nudes, why the hell don’t they just ban the accounts that try to send nudes to minors? Also who the hell thinks it is a good idea to send nudes to Meta?

[-] Quik@infosec.pub 46 points 2 months ago

I would suspect because there is probably space for errors in the detection system

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

And also probably money. Banning users tends to make them not want to keep using your platform.

[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 32 points 2 months ago

Also who the hell thinks it is a good idea to send nudes to Meta?

It was eye-opening when I realized I'm the only one in my circle who gives a shit about online privacy. You and me and most of the Fediverse are a rare minority. This is normal to people now. If you told people in the 90s about this they'd rightfully call it a dystopia. I remember my mother being super paranoid about me going online back then. Boiling frog situation here.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

Which is kinda funny because lemmy is really bad for privacy since pretty much everything is open. If you want to see how people vote, just make your own instance and collect it all.

Lemmy is relatively anonymous, but not private. It's still way better than anything Meta does.

[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

why the hell don’t they just ban the accounts that try to send nudes to minors?

Because they are sent from minors to minors too? Teens are horny, they copy adults making nudes, sometimes just sharing porn. Recently there were problems with classmates using pornLLM to undress their peers. The abuse problem is harsher, but I feel it's the minority of nudes received by minors. Honestly, I'd have changed the EULA to forbid it on a public service like Insta, because unlike messengers there is everything to be deanonymized and explicitly targeted by an abuser, including stalking and threats IRL. For Insta, there could be a rule to ban uploading images to Direct of <18 y.o. users, only reposts, meaning they are publically availiable and may get reported by other users and brought down by existing policies without breaking E2EE.

[-] RmDebArc_5@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Because they are sent from minors to minors too?

This could be different depending on the country, but in Germany that would still be illegal. I don’t think a rule like you suggest would ever happen if not forced by law

[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

I haven't heard of that law be strictly enforced tho. For one reason - teens are stupid and don't know laws, even though they fall under them. But yeah, most civilized places have laws against production of minor porn that doesn't specify age, but can walk around the problem if it's produced by a consenting party, of themselves, and without a big age difference.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 55 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If they can detect nudes to blur them out, why not simply not have them sent at all?

But also: Imagine being so ugly, even when you're not sending nudes it thinks you're sending nudes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 53 points 2 months ago

So... they can identify when someone in a conversation is a minor. And they can identify when nudes are being sent. But when these two are combined, they figure just blurring the image is the appropriate solution?

[-] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 29 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Perhaps to avoid false positives? I think it's telling the minor, "hey, this might be a dick. Open only if you trust the person".

[-] EvilBit@lemmy.world 45 points 2 months ago

Yeah, this is definitely gonna work, as if I haven’t been over 18 years old since I was 12 years old, according to every birthdate question ever.

[-] LostXOR@fedia.io 16 points 2 months ago

According to every site ever I was born on Jan 1, 2000.

[-] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

Fake age comparison really making me feel old. Mine was Jan 1,1980

[-] bizzle@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Lmfao for real, putting my fake age as born in 2000 would make me younger 🙃

[-] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Only since 2018. Before then I was born on 1/1/1990.

[-] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago

That was well below 18 for most of the time I have used the Internet. People born on that day were toddlers when I started to seriously use the Internet.

I could nowadays enter my real DOB and get through all checks but I usually still pick something in the 1970s or 1980s.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

If the default date is old enough to get past the prompt, I use that one. If it isn't, I pick a random year that is. I don't have to lie unless I want a senior discount or something, but I just don't want to share my birthdate with any random site or service.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Nice. I just scroll randomly a bit. I think it's funny getting random birthday wishes throughout the year.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jaagruk@mander.xyz 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I am 15 and 24 on Insta 😅

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 32 points 2 months ago

Wouldn't not permitting minors to use the service at all make this issue moot?

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 26 points 2 months ago

But that doesn't make Meta money.

[-] BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

They're already lying to get passed the 13 year requirement so I doubt it would make any difference.

[-] qprimed@lemmy.ml 27 points 2 months ago

lots of comments about e2e encryption (or the potential lack thereof)

even if it is e2e encrypted (and I mostly believe it is), once its decrypted on your device (in their app) its in the clear. there is nothing technical preventing the app from then inspecting the data or forwardiing the data to another party for analysis - thats a "terms and conditions" issue.

the article claims they are doing some on-device recognition - thats likely computationally non-trivial, with variable accuracy (false positives/negatives, anyone) and probably at least partially circumventable and perhaps even exploitable (more app surface area to attack).

so, ok... its a lead-in to classifying content on your device. I have no idea what comes next, but I am pretty sure there will be a next and this is why I don't intentially use any meta products.

[-] Lutra@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Which is a end-game around E2E. Saying 'the message is encrypted', but yes, I look at all messages before and/or after violates the expectation of E2E.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago

I've said this from the start, and people called me names, or "prove it". Sigh.

If the capability is there, that's a problem.

[-] arin@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago

Can the senders be sent to jail as well?

[-] vox@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 months ago
[-] clgoh@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago

It's an option for adults.

[-] vox@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 months ago

should be on by default except trusted users

[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

Great, now our youth will have premature forehead wrinkles from all the squinting they will need to do.

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 7 points 2 months ago

Honestly seems like a healthy feature. Everything is supposedly on-device, so it's not like the AI police are banning anything, just smartly giving tools and advice to vulnerable people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tostos@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

what? is insta allowing nudes Ö

[-] Zink@pawb.social 2 points 2 months ago

In case it wasn't already obvious that they are not encrypting like they said they were...

[-] boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Did anyone ask for this feature? Are you telling me that when a kid receives a photo blurred out in IG, shim is just going move on and be like 'gee I'm just going to have to wait'. They have to have a phone number and email address to set up the account right??!!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
137 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

55606 readers
2522 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS