I believe it's practical and that I could build it, Alex says it isn't but handwaves away anyone asking why not. So, who knows...
-
-
Replying to @taviso @alexstamos
i think there are rough edges: - if your classifier mistakenly decides that a photo shouldn't be automatically blocked, what happens? - i guess you have to rate limit the classifier (depends on the limitations of your TEE); solved by making PoW an input to the classifier?
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I don't know if I'm convinced it's necessary, I think just standard procedures (require account, rate limiting, bans, etc) will prevent abuse and just proving you've seen it first and delaying until moderation is good enough. But if people disagree, the problems are solvable.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taviso @alexstamos
i don't know enough about the false positive/negative rates of these image hashing algorithms to draw a conclusion here. "seen it first" on its own is such a fickle metric because there's an entire Internet of content that Facebook hasn't "seen" yet.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
but it seems to me that, regardless of the pitfalls of this method, you could deploy both at once and collect at least some data on its effectiveness in practice (not comprehensive though, because people won't necessarily upload adversarial input while the old system is in place)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @saleemrash1d @alexstamos
It's not blocking though, it's just temporarily delaying sharing while you're moderating it, with a pretty good signal that you own the image, and options for improving the signal. Is that really so bad that we should give up and say, "just mail facebook employees your nudes"?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taviso @alexstamos
Saleem Rashid Retweeted Saleem Rashid
so we're on the same page here, you started with the premise of "my solution is always >= Facebook's solution" and that therefore Alex's point made no sense. i was merely presenting the case where it did have merit.https://twitter.com/saleemrash1d/status/1196513128357515267 …
Saleem Rashid added,
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @saleemrash1d @alexstamos
Tavis Ormandy Retweeted Tavis Ormandy
No, I've already explained that both systems have that limitation.https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1196524371898028032 …
Tavis Ormandy added,
Tavis OrmandyVerified account @tavisoReplying to @saleemrash1d @alexstamosNo it doesn't. If the photo is already being shared when you submit it, it doesn't stop until moderation. That is the same in both systems. If it hasn't been shared yet, it can be blocked first in both systems. The difference is no new people see your nudes until abuse with hash.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taviso @alexstamos
i haven't at all mentioned the case where the photo has already been shared.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
There are only two possible cases. It has already been shared, or it hasn't. In the first, both systems require a moderation delay. In the second, both systems can prevent sharing. Therefore, >= is correct, because the second system doesn't require mailing your nudes to facebook.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.