1027
Google’s ‘Secret’ Update Scans All Your Photos
(www.forbes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
1027 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
69449 readers
3424 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
To quote the most salient post
Which is a sorely needed feature to tackle problems like SMS scams
Why do you need machine learning for detecting scams?
Is someone in 2025 trying to help you out of the goodness of their heart? No. Move on.
Blaming the victim solves nothing.
Scamming is a rapidly growing industry that is becoming more professional and specialized all the time. Anyone can be scammed.
if the cellular carriers were forced to verify that caller-ID (or SMS equivalent) was accurate SMS scams would disappear (or at least be weaker). Google shouldn't have to do the job of the carriers, and if they wanted to implement this anyway they should let the user choose what service they want to perform the task similar to how they let the user choose which "Android system WebView" should be used.
No, that wouldn't make much difference. I don't think I've seen a real world attack via SMS that even bothered to "forge" the from-field. People are used to getting texts from unknown numbers.
And how would you possibly implement this supposed "caller-id" for a field that doesn't even have to be set to a number?
caller id is the thing that tells you the number. it isn't cheap to forge, but it's the only way a scan could reasonably effect anyone with more than half a brain. there is never a reason to send information to an unknown SMS number, or click on a link from a text message from an unknown number.
You don't need advanced scanning technology running on every device with access to every single bit of data you ever seen to detect scam. You need telco operator to stop forwarding forged messages headers and… that's it. Cheap, efficient, zero risk related to invasion of privacy through a piece of software you did not need but was put there "for your own good".
I will perhaps be nitpicking, but... not exactly, not always. People get their shit hacked all the time due to poor practices. And then those hacked things can send emails and texts and other spam all they want, and it'll not be forged headers, so you still need spam filtering.