Mastodon, an alternative social network to Twitter, has a serious problem with child sexual abuse material according to researchers from Stanford University. In just two days, researchers found over 100 instances of known CSAM across over 325,000 posts on Mastodon. The researchers found hundreds of posts containing CSAM related hashtags and links pointing to CSAM trading and grooming of minors. One Mastodon server was even taken down for a period of time due to CSAM being posted. The researchers suggest that decentralized networks like Mastodon need to implement more robust moderation tools and reporting mechanisms to address the prevalence of CSAM.

  • Cylinsier@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The researchers suggest that decentralized networks like Mastodon need to implement more robust moderation tools and reporting mechanisms to address the prevalence of CSAM.

    I agree, but who’s going to pay for it? Those aren’t just freely available additions to any application that you only need to toggle on.

    • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I agree, but who’s going to pay for it?

      How about police/the tax payer?

      If university researchers can find the stuff, then police can find it too. There should be an established way to flag the user (or even the entire instance) so that content can be removed from the fediverse while simultaneously asking for all data that is available to try to catch the criminals.

      And of course, if regular users come across anything illegal they will report it too, and it should be removed quickly (I’d hope immediately in many cases, especially if the post was by a brand new/untrusted account).

      • swnt@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        A decentralised platform like the Fediverses won’t easily work with nation states and their taxes. Even with Wikipedia today, it’s not funded directly via any government - but rather by certain universities giving some money to it + all the private doners.

        And even if we get that working, power politics will mess this up like so often when things actually get troublesome.

        It might be interesting to explore cryptocurrencies as for donations here though. They do have international liquidity and they can’t be misused foe power politics.

        • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m not suggesting Beehaw/etc should be government funded. Rather I’m suggesting it’s already possible for basically anyone in the fediverse to report a post as needing urgent moderator attention.

          I think there will be tax payer funded efforts, donation funded efforts, volunteers, etc that are unaffiliated with any specific instance but go through major instances and hit the report button where they consider it to be appropriate — not just manually with people but also with automated tools such as searching for images by a hash of their contents or maybe even running messages through a Large Language Model to check if it is, for example, a form of targeted harassment.

          And yes, the report feature will be abused. That’s unavoidable and needs to be taken into account when deciding how to respond to a report. An algorithm could easily prioritise reports based on the history of past reports made by the same person / organisation.

          Stack Exchange has a pretty good system - decisions by individuals are not trusted. Rather those trigger a review by a randomly selected (and trusted) individual to get a second opinion. And even after a decision has been made and an action has been taken (ban a user, etc) there’s often a third or even fourth review. And there are processes to appeal and question decisions.

          It’s not an easy problem to solve, but as the creator of mastodon said - many hands make light work. The fediverse can some day have a billion people doing moderation tasks - where even simple acts like hitting the upvote button become part of the moderation system (upvote would imply that this account holder tends to make valuable contributions to the community, and should make the moderation system less likely to come down with a ban hammer).

          And I also think there is scope for some communities to be entirely government funded. For example I’d love for every city in the world to run an offical community, with official local government anouncements as well as moderated discussions relevant to people who live in or are visiting the city.

          • swnt@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am exactly doubting your suggestion of tax paid donations. I don’t think this will happen, unless we actually come together and try to actually enforce this on the political level in various countries.

            After all, open source software is an essential and critical foundation since many decades - but I’m not sure, whether there is any government that has made a pledge to donate a certain amount of money per year into the development and funding of such general purpose software. (Maybe I’m wrong though.)

            Before the fediverse can get any public funding, we need to make some political efforts. the UN is the largest such institution - and it took all the fiasco with the 2 world war to get many countries pledge to donate to it every year…

  • 🦊 OneRedFox 🦊@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah I recall that the Japanese instances have a big problem with that shit. As for the rest of us, Facebook actually open sourced some efficient hashing algorithms for use for dealing with CSAM; Fediverse platforms could implement these, which would just leave the issue of getting an image hash database to check against. All the big platforms could probably chip in to get access to one of those private databases and then release a public service for use with the ecosystem.

    • zephyrvs@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’d be useless though, because first, it’d probably opt-in via configuration settings and even if it wasn’t, people would just fork and modify the code base or simply switch to another ActivityPub implementation.

      We’re not gonna fix society using tech unless we’re all hooked up to some all knowing AI under government control.

      • crystal@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not the point. Yes, child porn sites can host child porn. Other sites/instances can’t stop that. But what other instances can stop, is redistributing said child porn. And for that purpose, such technology would be useful.

        • zephyrvs@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          researchers found 112 instances of known CSAM across 325,000 posts on the platform

          So you’re willing to vacuum up the hashes of every image file uploaded on thousands of decentralized systems into a centralized systems (that is out of “our” control and coupled with direct access for law enforcement and corporations) to prevent the distribution of 0.034% of files that are CSAM and that could just as well be reported and deleted by admins and moderators? Remember how Snowden warned us about metadata?

          If you think that’s a wise tradeoff, I guess, go ahead. But then I’d have to question the entire goal of being decentralized in the first place. If it’s all about “a billionare can’t wreak havok upon my social network”, then yeah, I guess decentralization helps a bit but even that remains to be seen.

          But if you’re actually willing to do that, you’d probably also be in favor of having government backdoors into chat encryption (and thus rendering the entire concept moot, because you can’t have backdoors that cannot be discovered by other nefarious actors) and even more censorship-resistant systems like Tor because evil people use it to exchange CSAM anonymously as well?

          • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you read the article, there’s actually more. The problem also isn’t just that they post the material directly onto Mastodon, they also use the platform to network.

          • crystal@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t know how you get the impression that this increases censorship.

            Instance admin already manually block content. And they are already able to do that to any extend they wish to do.

            This tool would simply automate that process.

            Admins would not gain or lose any ability to block content. Identifying child porn would simply be easier.

            (Imagine an admin going to their database and doing a CTRL+F with the term “child porn”, and then going through the posts to find offending ones. But instead of CTRL+F it’s an AI.)

            (For some reason I don’t get a notification when you answer my comment. Is that a known issue? Did you block me or something?)

            • jarfil@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t know how you get the impression that this increases censorship.

              This tool would simply automate that process.

              Well… precisely?

              Censorship is any removal of material considered “undesirable”, whether you agree with why it is considered “undesirable” or not.

              If you want more censorship of “material that you personally consider undesirable”, then just say so, don’t hide behind some disingenuous “but it isn’t censorship”. Then we can discuss the merits of that classification, and of the means proposed to achieve such censorship.

              • crystal@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                You seem to be missing my point.

                This tool would not increase censorship.

                Admins are already able to implement all censorship they want.

                Admins are already able to block left-wing opinions, right-wing opinions, child porn, normal porn.

                And that already happens.

                Lots of instances (like feddit.de) block pornographic content.

                Lots of instances (like lemmy.blahaj.zone) block right-wing content.

                It is already possible, and it is already happening.

                An AI which can detect CSAM (and potentially other content) won’t change that. It will simply make the admins’ job easier.

  • zygo_histo_morpheus@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Is there any way mastodon stands out from other self hosted websites? Would the CSAM material be harder to distribute or easier to prosecute if they ran, say, a self-hosted bulletin board for it instead?

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Privately hosted websites are only useful for established clients. Via social media and image sharing platforms the distributors try to reach new clientele. They often have more or less hidden tags and codes that can attract potential customers. When someone reacts to these they carefully try to see if the person could be trusted to have access to private sharing. It’s how drug dealers online sometimes work or extremist groups.

  • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    “massive child abuse material problem”

    “112 instances of known CSAM across 325,000 posts”

    While any instance is unacceptable, does 112/325,000 constitute a “massive problem”?

    0.0000034462% of posts are unacceptable! Massive problem!

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s just the material they knew was CSAM from previous investigations.

      There were also 713 uses of the top 20 CSAM-related hashtags across the Fediverse on posts that contained media, as well as 1,217 text-only posts that pointed to “off-site CSAM trading or grooming of minors.” The study notes that the open posting of CSAM is “disturbingly prevalent.”