> Technology doesn't live in a vacuum. Given the calls from the government for backdoors to encryption, I think it's safe to assume this is Apple getting out in front of what could likely be heavy handed legislation to add actual backdoors like master keys.
I broadly agree but I cannot foresee a scenario where limiting at this particular issue (CSAM) would be seen as a sufficient compromise by legislators to allow E2EE to be expanded.
And other countries will have very different interpretations, much less palatable to Apple's values, on what should be checked for and they will have no qualm legislating to require it.
Quoting the NY Times (via Daring Fireball) :
> Mr. Neuenschwander dismissed those concerns, saying that safeguards are in place to prevent abuse of the system and that Apple would reject any such demands from a government.
> “We will inform them that we did not build the thing they’re thinking of,” he said.
They can tell themselves that but it doesn't matter : they precisely did.
I broadly agree but I cannot foresee a scenario where limiting at this particular issue (CSAM) would be seen as a sufficient compromise by legislators to allow E2EE to be expanded.
And other countries will have very different interpretations, much less palatable to Apple's values, on what should be checked for and they will have no qualm legislating to require it.
Quoting the NY Times (via Daring Fireball) :
> Mr. Neuenschwander dismissed those concerns, saying that safeguards are in place to prevent abuse of the system and that Apple would reject any such demands from a government.
> “We will inform them that we did not build the thing they’re thinking of,” he said.
They can tell themselves that but it doesn't matter : they precisely did.