Google Aims To Cull Child Porn By Algorithm, Not Human Review

According to a story at VentureBeat, "Google is working on a new database of flagged images of child porn and abuse that can be shared with other search engines and child protection organizations. The database will help create systems that automatically eliminate that sort of content. ... If the database is used effectively, any flagged image in the database would not be searchable through participating search engines or web hosting providers. And maybe best of all, computers will automatically flag and remove these images without any human needing to see them." Here's the announcement.

Comments

What is the point of this?

[Electricity Likes Me]

What is the point of automatically removing child porn so it's not searchable. That's not the problem with child porn.

The problem with child porn is real children are being really abused to make it.

Making it "not searchable" doesn't stop that. Arresting the people who are making it does.

Re:What is the point of this?

[TheBlackMan]

Exactly.

Also, I am browsing the net since at least 12 years and i have NEVER found child porn by accident or whatsoever. I am thinking that child porn can be found only in the "dark internet".

So that makes one wonder what Google's real motives are.

Re:What is the point of this?

[ebno-10db]

True, which means this isn't a solution. It is about as much as a search engine can do though, so it's to Google's credit.

Re:What is the point of this?

[Errol backfiring]

if the algorithm finds something, it will warm law enforcement.

I may not always agree with law enforcement, but I do not think they are THAT corrupt.

Re:What is the point of this?

[ebno-10db]

Realistically this is just a feel good effort. No one is going to seriously criticize Google for this, and they can say "we're doing our part". Not that their part really helps anything, but that's not Google's fault.

So that makes one wonder what Google's real motives are.

Good PR. I'm as cynical as the next person, but PR is often the only motive for these things. If they had a sinister motive, they'd just offer to help the NSA some more.

Re:What is the point of this?

[Mitreya]

Turned out to be a false positive? I won't sleep much over it, unless someone genuinely innocent gets destroyed by this. But probabilistically, the chance of such occurrence is so low, not impossible, but so extremely low (truly innocent person in possession of child porn), I'm willing to live with the consequences.

You, sir, are a grade-A asshole

Are you considering the possibility that you might be the target of the false positive (however unlikely)? Because it is mighty kind of you to be willing to live with the consequences of someone else's life being ruined due to false positive.

All of this would be a less horrible idea if the law enforcement found a less damaging way to investigate (i.e. keep the accusation completely private until it is proven in court). Otherwise lives are utterly ruined well before the investigation is concluded.

Re:What is the point of this?

[dgatwood]

The goal is to eliminate the known child porn, not to decide what is or is not child porn. Presumably their database will come from law enforcement agencies. That said, your comment brings up a valid point—that you can't always tell what is or is not legal. Those photos of that Hollywood actress a few years ago were taken when she was only 17. The fact that she took them and sent them to her boyfriend doesn't change the fact that (assuming she wasn't lying to try to make the photos go away) possessing those photos is technically illegal under child porn laws.

This raises a more interesting question: Will it be possible for individuals to query that database? For example, if someone downloads a picture from somewhere and can't tell with certainty whether the girl is legal or not, could that person anonymously query the database to determine the legality of that photo? I mean, obviously the database would be incomplete, so lack of data does not necessarily indicate legality, but I could see something similar to virus scanners that periodically scan your porn collection against the child porn database and alert you to anything that shows up in that database so you can delete it. That would be a useful tool for staying on the right side of a law that is otherwise basically impossible to comply with (at least with any degree of certainty), particularly if it came with information describing how the age of the person in particular photo was determined and the level of certainty involved. For example, for a presumably legal photo, it might return "Over 18. Certainty: low. Reason: not found in database" or it might contain "Over 18. Certainty: high. Reason: Playboy affidavit" or anything in between.

I hope they really mean child

[Mal-2]

If they mean "all underage" and not just "blatantly children", good luck with that. There are no characteristics that will distinguish between 17 and 18, or even older. What is the software going to think of Kat Young, for example? What about models who are just small?

Also are they going to attempt to sort through drawings at all, considering they are legal in some jurisdictions and not others?

I sense false positives and angry models in Google's future.

Re:I hope they really mean child

[ebno-10db]

This is about detecting known images (presumably even if altered a bit), not automatically detecting if a heretofore unseen image is CP. From the Google announcement:

Since 2008, we’ve used “hashing” technology to tag known child sexual abuse images, allowing us to identify duplicate images which may exist elsewhere. Each offending image in effect gets a unique ID that our computers can recognize without humans having to view them again . Recently, we’ve started working to incorporate encrypted “fingerprints” of child sexual abuse images into a cross-industry database. This will enable companies, law enforcement and charities to better collaborate on detecting and removing these images, and to take action against the criminals. Today we’ve also announced a $2 million Child Protection Technology Fund to encourage the development of ever more effective tools. [emphasis added]

Not sure I agree 100% that this is a good idea....

[realsilly]

Let me be clear about this. I DO NOT condone child pornography at all; I find it foul and disgusting. But there is a over-reaching that I think may go on here. If I purchase a server and I engage in a P2P network, then it is not Google nor any one else's business what I transmit. If the server is a public server or one owned by a company (such as Google), then I would agree they have every right to remove such foul content from their servers.

Yes I would rather that the people who engage in this be stopped. But whenever programs like this are created they tend to start out being put to use with the best of intentions, but will likely be used for other more nefarious purposes. If this algorithm is used to sniff out child pornography, it could be modified to sniff out a information about a political party and quell it, or news that a government agency doesn't want people to know about.

With all that has recently come to light about the spying by the US Govt. can you really say that this with 100% certainty that this technology won't be abuse for other purposes? I can't.

Again I DO NOT condone Child Pornography.

Exactly - and how do you define underage?

[Viol8]

The age of consent in spain is 14, in the uk 16, in the USA 18 , so if there's a picture of a nude 15 or 17 year old in what country does it get to decided if its legal?

While this may be a laudable effort I have the sneaking feeling the USA once again will be pushing its legal system and morality onto the rest of the world.