Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning · HackerPapers discussions

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — mentioned by EmbarrassedHelp

Tue, 21 Jul 2026 20:26:19 GMT

The judge's comments are extremely disturbing, as she seems to want legislation passed that requires companies to violate user privacy. And client side scanning is just as bad as encryption backdoors. There's a good reason Apple was attacked for even considering it: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.07450

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — mentioned by EmbarrassedHelp

Mon, 06 Apr 2026 02:49:02 GMT

In terms of censorship, it is impossible to confirm that every hash in the database is what the database owner claims it to be. Its also completely unacceptable for encrypted/private messages, according to some of the top experts on the subject, "Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning": https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.07450

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Tue, 26 Oct 2021 20:24:05 GMT

Bugs in our pockets: the risks of client-side scanning

204 points; 131 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Fri, 22 Oct 2021 12:44:28 GMT

Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning

5 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Tue, 19 Oct 2021 17:52:50 GMT

Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning (2021)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:26:29 GMT

Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Sat, 16 Oct 2021 11:10:22 GMT

Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — mentioned by uniqueuid

Fri, 15 Oct 2021 16:29:42 GMT

This is a blog post on a paper [1] by Hal Abelson, Ross Anderson, Steven M. Bellovin, Josh Benaloh, Matt Blaze, Jon Callas, Whitfield Diffie, Susan Landau, Peter G. Neumann, Ronald L. Rivest, Jeffrey I. Schiller, Bruce Schneier, Vanessa Teague, Carmela Troncoso. To me, the gist is: There is no technical way to make client-side scanning psychologically trustworthy. There are many plausible policy threats. So this boils down to: The decisions is with governments (some of which are bad) and users (who don't give a collective fuck), so governments will begin to decide the fate of these systems.…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Bugs in our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning — HN submission

Fri, 15 Oct 2021 07:10:35 GMT

Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning

4 points; 1 discussion reply on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.