Doesn't instagram claim messages are e2e encrypted? How can this work without them having access to all messages?
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
145 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
68441 readers
2677 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
On device image recognition?
doubt.
They aren't E2EE by default. You have to enable it manually.
Ah okay, thanks, I don't use Instagram.
It is all closed-source anyway, so would not count on this "e2e".
End to end is exactly what it says. It's decrypted at both ends.
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?
I would suspect because there is probably space for errors in the detection system
And also probably money. Banning users tends to make them not want to keep using your platform.
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.
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.
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.
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
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)
Because not everyone lives in ~~Saudi-Arabia or Texas~~ a country dominated by religious conservatives?
ETA: I'm sorry. I shouldn't have made it about specific countries.
So you're saying you want to send nudes to minors?
If an 18 year old girl sends a spicy picture to her 17 year old boyfriend, that probably shouldn't warrant the same reaction as a 15 year old receiving porn in her dms from some 40 year old stranger. Black and white thinking typically doesn't lead to fair policies and implying that someone wants to creep on random children because they recognize that nuance exists seems a little disingenuous.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
ان شاء الله نحن العالم
load more comments
(1 replies)
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?
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".
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.
According to every site ever I was born on Jan 1, 2000.
Fake age comparison really making me feel old. Mine was Jan 1,1980
Lmfao for real, putting my fake age as born in 2000 would make me younger 🙃
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.
Only since 2018. Before then I was born on 1/1/1990.
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I am 15 and 24 on Insta 😅
Wouldn't not permitting minors to use the service at all make this issue moot?
But that doesn't make Meta money.
They're already lying to get passed the 13 year requirement so I doubt it would make any difference.
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.
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.
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.
Can the senders be sent to jail as well?
why only to minors
It's an option for adults.
should be on by default except trusted users
Great, now our youth will have premature forehead wrinkles from all the squinting they will need to do.
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.
"Supposedly"
Right.
Why not just don't allow minors to use the service?
In case it wasn't already obvious that they are not encrypting like they said they were...
what? is insta allowing nudes Ö