Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel • Hacker News Board

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#91

Post by dang » Thu, May 30, 2019, 7:38 PM UTC

gambler wrote: post #22

buildzr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be too easy to fake, just replace the sensor in an approved camera with your own data feed. And that's assuming it wouldn't be somewhat trivial to dump keys from one or more cameras on the market to create a an easy tool or resignvideo.com... which is a massive assumption. As the movie industry has already seen, cryptography doesn't help you when you push out the keys to everyone. It'd be about as effective as D…

You're not thinking this through. The problem isn't that creators can make fake videos (which would be analogous to DRM). Let them. There is no harm in it. The problem is that users have no way of verifying true videos. This can be solved with cryptography, because both parties involved (creators and viewers) would want this to work. In other words, DRM is about forcing everyone to do a thing. Verification is about a…

> You're not thinking this through.

Would you please edit swipes like that (and "you must live in a parallel universe, to put it politely") out of your comments here? They break the guidelines, lower the signal/noise ratio, and invite more of the same from others. Your comments would be just fine without those bits.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#92

Post by dang » Thu, May 30, 2019, 7:39 PM UTC

jdietrich wrote: post #40

gambler wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not thinking this through. The problem isn't that creators can make fake videos (which would be analogous to DRM). Let them. There is no harm in it. The problem is that users have no way of verifying true videos. This can be solved with cryptography, because both parties involved (creators and viewers) would want this to work. In other words, DRM is about forcing everyone to do a thing. Verification is about a…

I'm sorry, but you're not thinking this through. Being able to prove that a video file is the unaltered output of a particular camera is in no way a useful protection against fake videos. Proving that file A is genuine tells us nothing about whether file B is fake. Let's say I want to create and circulate a fake sex tape featuring a senior politician. In a world where signed sensors are common but not mandatory, the…

> I'm sorry, but you're not thinking this through.

Please don't respond to swipes with more swipes. Your comment would be just fine without that bit.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#93

Post by evan_ » Thu, May 30, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

bdamm wrote: post #77

ajuc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a video of a politician taking a bribe. How do you verify it's real? You can't - because the camera of the guy that published it says it's not modified, but it could be just as well a camera recording a display with the fake playing.

Cameras recording displays also leave artifacts in the resulting stream. There would at the very least likely be a moire pattern somewhere, at some level, and somehow the capturing camera would need to resolve that. That resolution will leave a fingerprint.

“I work at a hotel and $politician came in with his mistress. Here’s a video I taped off of the security monitor.”

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#94

Post by pessimizer » Thu, May 30, 2019, 7:51 PM UTC

xienze wrote: post #72

jdietrich wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're arguing that at some point in the future, nobody will give even the slightest credence to amateur footage captured on camera phones, small business CCTV systems and a million other sorts of non-corporately-owned camera? Because I think that future is worse than the one that's full of fake video.

> So you're arguing that at some point in the future, nobody will give even the slightest credence to amateur footage captured on camera phones I think that's the end goal of all the "deep fake" hysteria we're being primed with. In the future if some damning video of a politician or other elite member of society pops up the defense will simply be "well you can't rule out that it's a fake, look, it's not signed and it…

Or the end goal of the "fake news" scare in general (not to say that there aren't sites that specialize in making up news.) To combat "fake news," you start whitelisting "true news," and defining it by the influence of the provider, not the content. In the end, you just end up with state news sources.

related: It's telling that "factchecking" isn't a dialogue between various authorities, but instead just a bunch of weird private judicial systems with no appeals courts, selected and assigned to specific stories by internet aggregation intermediaries. Eventually, this can't help but shake out as stories being divided into two categories: factual and banned from distribution.

I sadly feel that we're about 10 years away from licensing journalists with a security clearance-type process that must be sponsored by an approved outlet. The PropOrNot at the Post shook me a bit.

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#95

Post by buildzr » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:08 PM UTC

gambler wrote: post #68

buildzr wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what world is content creators needing to prove the footage they took is "real" a problem? Considering most content creators also do post editing I don't think that has any relationship at all to what's being discussed. We're talking about the kind of video that triggers a scandal, be it a police shooting, politician caught committing a crime, sex tape, etc. This is not the kind of thing being captured by "content…

I will try explaining this for the last time. We already live in the word where a video is not a 100% proof that something happened. Given enough time and money you can use video editing, actors and CGI do show almost anything. This does not, however, completely invalidate all videos as evidence, because the cost of faking something is fairly high. Deep fakes can potentially decrease the cost of impersonation of some…

That has nothing to do with the comment you responded to:

Can you explain what you mean as the distinction between "content creators" and "some arbitrary video online" if the same technology is used to "authenticate" both?

> Like most security, it's all about the costs involved in attacks and mitigations.

Ignoring the fact that this could likely be done fairly cheaply, unlike other security improvements this actually weakens the next layer down substantially, faked content that does beat the system introduces a new seal of approval on that content. I don't want to see people get convicted because footage that's later found out to be faked has a green checkmark when the jury watches it.

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#96

Post by buildzr » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:09 PM UTC

evan_ wrote: post #93

bdamm wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cameras recording displays also leave artifacts in the resulting stream. There would at the very least likely be a moire pattern somewhere, at some level, and somehow the capturing camera would need to resolve that. That resolution will leave a fingerprint.

“I work at a hotel and $politician came in with his mistress. Here’s a video I taped off of the security monitor.”

That's actually an excellent point, even if such technology worked perfectly it wouldn't solve simple problems like that.

Seeing footage literally taped by a phone off a NVR display is pretty common...

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#97

Post by swiley » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:20 PM UTC

buildzr wrote: post #11

_red wrote: post #8

I would imagine that in the future video encoders will start to automatically include a cryptographic signature every X frames, which then players will become aware of and show an indicator for "original / modified" content.

It'd be too easy to fake, just replace the sensor in an approved camera with your own data feed. And that's assuming it wouldn't be somewhat trivial to dump keys from one or more cameras on the market to create a an easy tool or resignvideo.com... which is a massive assumption. As the movie industry has already seen, cryptography doesn't help you when you push out the keys to everyone. It'd be about as effective as D…

Better would be for people/organizations to be in the habit of signing things they publish.

This is fundamentally just another MITM attack.

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#98

Post by zarmin » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:21 PM UTC

brootstrap wrote: post #85

atonalfreerider wrote: post #33

How about training a neutral net on fake videos to make it able to detect faked videos.

easier said than done my friend.

whattya mean? you just train it. it's a neural network. /s

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#99

Post by tcmb » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:23 PM UTC

mromanuk wrote: post #4

a few days ago, I was searching YouTube for a video on my TV and I found Bill Hader's impression of Arnold Schwarzenegger, which is impressive BTW, but I didn't realize what was going on with his face. At first I thought, wow, he's physiognomy is like Arnold, but something weird was going on. It took several trials until I realize that Arnold's face was superimposed on Bill's face. Spooky.

I had a similar experience with that same video. It was suggested to me in the YT recommendations (I had watched Bill Hader on Late Show with Stephen Colbert previously).

I genuinely thought "wow, when he squints his eyes he really looks like Arnold". The transitions between Bill's own face and Arnold's were totally seemless to me.

I finally realized what was going on when I saw the channel's name, and it spooked me that I had fallen for it.

Re: Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

#100

Post by mromanuk » Thu, May 30, 2019, 8:33 PM UTC

tcmb wrote: post #99

mromanuk wrote: post #4

a few days ago, I was searching YouTube for a video on my TV and I found Bill Hader's impression of Arnold Schwarzenegger, which is impressive BTW, but I didn't realize what was going on with his face. At first I thought, wow, he's physiognomy is like Arnold, but something weird was going on. It took several trials until I realize that Arnold's face was superimposed on Bill's face. Spooky.

I had a similar experience with that same video. It was suggested to me in the YT recommendations (I had watched Bill Hader on Late Show with Stephen Colbert previously). I genuinely thought "wow, when he squints his eyes he really looks like Arnold". The transitions between Bill's own face and Arnold's were totally seemless to me. I finally realized what was going on when I saw the channel's name, and it spooked me…

> I genuinely thought "wow, when he squints his eyes he really looks like Arnold". The transitions between Bill's own face and Arnold's were totally seemless to me.

my experience, exactly