← Back to context

Comment by eecc

4 years ago

So, it’s not that other platforms are any better!

Are you sure intel, AMD, Arm or windows TPM aren’t snitching on you? Do we need to make our own silicon from ingot?

There’s no technological solution to this problem, only social and legislative.

14 comments

eecc

Reply
GeekyBear  4 years ago

Have people already forgotten that Microsoft implemented the tech to routinely scan your cloud storage a decade ago?

>The system that scans cloud drives for illegal images was created by Microsoft and Dartmouth College and donated to NCMEC. The organization creates signatures of the worst known images of child pornography, approximately 16,000 files at present. These file signatures are given to service providers who then try to match them to user files in order to prevent further distribution of the images themselves, a Microsoft spokesperson told NBC News. (Microsoft implemented image-matching technology in its own services, such as Bing and SkyDrive.)

https://www.nbcnews.com/technolog/your-cloud-drive-really-pr...

Didn't the Windows 10 TOS extend that scanning to local storage as well?

  • neycoda  4 years ago

    I'm OK with software generating signatures from cloud drive images to eliminate child porn pictures and catch pedophiles.

    • raxxorrax  4 years ago

      Have you ever had the impression that special interests are much more interested in copyright violations than child pornography? Or that it might extend to memes that sabotages carefully crafted propaganda? I do have that impression a lot.

      I don't step in the lowest parts of the internet hell, but I am also not very picky about it. I have never encountered child pornography in 10 years of almost pathological internet usage.

      2 replies →

    • AlexandrB  4 years ago

      You should read the rest of the linked Twitter thread, because the issue is that if the hash algorithm has a collision vulnerability, any image could be manipulated to show up as "child porn" to the scanner.

      2 replies →

    • subsection1h  4 years ago

      LOL. Your HN account is only a year old, so maybe you weren't alive when the Patriot Act was passed and people like you supported it because of all the scary terrorists.

      "Known as a 'sneak and peek' warrant, law enforcement was adamant Section 213 was needed to protect against terrorism. But the latest government report detailing the numbers of 'sneak and peek' warrants reveals that out of a total of over 11,000 sneak and peek requests, only 51 were used for terrorism."

      https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/10/peekaboo-i-see-you-gov...

gruez  4 years ago

>windows TPM aren’t snitching on you?

The TPM FUD has really gone out of hand.

1. there's no such thing as "windows TPMs", whatever that means.

2. TPMs basically has zero access to the rest of the system. It's connected via a LPC bus, so there's no fancy DMA attacks to pull off. Over that bus the system firmware sends various hashes of the system state (eg. hash of your bootloader), but that's about it.

  • warkdarrior  4 years ago

    > 2. TPMs basically has zero access to the rest of the system. It's connected via a LPC bus, so there's no fancy DMA attacks to pull off. Over that bus the system firmware sends various hashes of the system state (eg. hash of your bootloader), but that's about it.

    That's the specification. Have you actually monitored the bus using probes? Did you check that the TPM is only connected to LPC?