Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ctrl Shift Face: A growing ‘deepfakes’ YouTube channel

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–128 of 128 posts

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

#121

Post by bob_doggo »

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…

As a random user, this is what I would like:

When I watch a video-clip of, let's say a press-conference, it would be nice to have a way to verify that the video-clip is indeed the one recorded by whatever journalist was at the press-conference.

It's not about camera hardware, it's about making it easy to check if the video someone is presenting to me is what they claim it is.

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

#122

Post by bob_doggo »

jdietrich wrote: post #57
deckar01 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to be able to prove the video is raw footage, you just need to be able to verify that a publisher you trust says they recorded it. An HMAC allows you to verify that a message (like a video file) was not modified after the author signed it.

Hypothetical: An anonymous source releases CCTV footage that appears to show a public figure urinating on a homeless person. Do you really believe that we'll all ignore that footage because the signature doesn't belong to a major news organisation?

We probably won't ignore that. So, the "signature solution" doesn't solve every problem, but I would still argue that it solves enough problems, that it would be worth spending resources on trying to implement it.

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

#123

Post by bdamm »

buildzr wrote: post #96
evan_ wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“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...

Yeah, but it also is usually pretty obvious about what it is. That's hard to cover up.

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

#124

Post by darepublic »

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…

To play devil's advocate, video evidence is already not very strong. Can't it already be faked enough without this technology such that we should never trust it as irrefutable proof of anything

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

#125

Post by buildzr »

bdamm wrote: post #123
buildzr wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Yeah, but it also is usually pretty obvious about what it is. That's hard to cover up.

It's actually not too bad - you have to essentially line up the pixels on the camera's sensor with the pixels on the display, it's a challenge and might involve some careful choices of camera, display, focal length, distance, etc, but you only have to get it right once. This gets even easier with a projector where pixels can be blended together, that's why cam'd movies can be surprisingly watchable, despite being filmed in far less than optimal conditions, they don't show the sort of artifacts you're talking about. While poor contrast can certainly be an issue in such situations, think about how poor that setup is compared to what would be possible with a purpose built version.

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

#126

Post by redisman »

robotzero wrote: post #114
redisman wrote: post #108

One thing I don't see talked about much is the Uncanny Valley. No other technology has made it past it and looking at these they definitely have not either. Is there any reason to think that "deepfakes" will leapfrog it somehow?

I can't say that though... had these videos been sent to me and it was mentioned "Arnold lost weight" or "Brad Pitt reshot the scene after shedding some pounds" I'd have probably been less of a sceptic and in a quick pass this "fake news" could have got a pass from me or others. It's an interesting time and if you're doing cursory browsing of news bites for the day this may fly right past...

The Fight Club one I couldn't tell was I looking at Edward Norton or Brad Pitt the whole time. Definitely in the valley for me but I guess I was looking for it.

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

#127

Post by deckar01 »

munk-a wrote: post #83
deckar01 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to be able to prove the video is raw footage, you just need to be able to verify that a publisher you trust says they recorded it. An HMAC allows you to verify that a message (like a video file) was not modified after the author signed it.

I absolutely agree with this point but I think it's terrifying - rather than a reassurance. In modern society our "truth" is becoming partitioned into tribal groups with topics as extreme as the curvature of the earth and efficacy of vaccines being suddenly up for debate. If someone like Alex Jones were to publish a video where the Clintons discuss making the frogs gay then his audience - a decent portion of which tr…

Publishing has always been based on trust. Trusting publishers with a track record of openness and journalists with a track record of integrity is the best we have. We just have more options for cross referencing information now.

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

#128

Post by knowuh »

mises wrote: post #25
knowuh wrote: post #18

Someone has to put a deepfake Zuckerberg video up on Facebook where he forecasts a terrible financial quarter. Maybe that would have some influence about how seriously they take takedown requests.

To any one who reads this, don't actually do that. I wouldn't put it past Facebook to file a serious lawsuit against you. If it spread far enough, you could cause serious damage, and the SEC might even get involved.

If they did chase such a lawsuit, it would expose them as having serious double standards as per the recent Pelosi news item: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/technology/facebook-pelos...

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday strongly rebuked Facebook, saying the company’s refusal to take down altered videos of her demonstrated how the social network contributed to misinformation"

Post reply on HN