Live data from Hacker News

Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

github.com

321–330 of 336 posts

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just some rationalization that security nerds like to regurgitate on each other.

Exposing a vulnerability in a public forum is the fastest way to patch said vulnerability. You don’t have to be a security nerd to connect the dots

> Exposing a vulnerability in a public forum is the fastest way to patch said vulnerability.

Unjustified empirical claim.

And even if it were true, it would still be insufficient for justifying public disclosure, classic is-ought.

Also, only nerds stand up for security nerds.

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#322

> Authors and contributing developers assume no liability and are not responsible for any misuse or damage caused by the use of this program. Anything that can be created, will be created. However, that doesn't free you from all moral culpability. If you create something, make it freely accessible and easy to use, then I think you are partly responsible for its misuse. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have created…

> then I think you are partly responsible for its misuse

irrelevant

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#323

> Authors and contributing developers assume no liability and are not responsible for any misuse or damage caused by the use of this program. Anything that can be created, will be created. However, that doesn't free you from all moral culpability. If you create something, make it freely accessible and easy to use, then I think you are partly responsible for its misuse. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have created…

What authors _could_ do is to add some kind of secret watermark that would only be shared with select government agencies and perhaps software companies that could be trusted to keep it secret.

That way, the software could be used for pen testing, but it could cause a silent trigger to go off.

That could even be a way to monetize the software....

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having morals when the other side doesn't is a weakness. Make the tools available to everyone. As Elon musk says, sun is the best disinfectant.

Having morals when the other side doesn't is the best possible reason to be on different sides.

Morals are cultural.. in some countries it means burning gay people.

Power however, is amoral and neutral

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#325

I work at Axis, which makes surveillance cameras.[0] This comment is my own, and is not on behalf of the company. I'm using a throwaway account because I'd rather not be identified (and because surveillance is quite controversial here). Axis has developed a way to cryptographically sign video, using TPMs (Trusted Platform Module) built into the cameras and embedding the signature into the h.264 stream.[1] The video c…

Hey, off topic but I love your cameras and the attention to detail you put in them, especially in regards to what helps the tech install them.

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#326
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

history say you cannot control how selected the selected group is, no matter the implications, i.e. nuclear bomb secrets from manatthan project finding their way into russian hands https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/spies-who-spilled-ato...

That's just not true. If you couldn't control the spread at all, some terrorist group would have already detonated one.

I thought I had the knowledge to build a nuclear bomb when I was in high school. In retrospect, I'm not sure I was right, but I'm pretty sure I was close to right. From where I was, I certainly could have picked up the knowledge as an undergrad; it's no longer a hard problem with publicly-available information.

For better or worse, I did not have the requisite $2B-or-so to do so at the time. My allowance was $2/week. I don't think most terrorist groups have $2B either. Even if I did have the requisite $2B, I don't think I could have done so discreetly enough to not get caught; someone would have noticed a high school student buying up things like uranium or building appropriate facilities.

I'm more concerned about biological warfare. While I don't have the knowledge to engineer a super-virus, we're at the level where a few years intense study is all it takes to have that knowledge, and a few high school students do. The cost structure there is increasingly moving into the budget of high school students too. Things like DNA sequencing and synthesis have a Moore's Law-style curve, with falling prices.

(If this sounds unrealistic, I was in high school back in the days when nerds intensely learned physics; physics is much less interesting to nerds in 2022. Hot topics for nerds change over time, and we're out of the cold war and the space age. Today's high school nerds have moved on to today's hot topics like machine learning and microbiology)

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The surveillance states wet dream, where you can just look up who took that ‘unfair’ video of your agent breaking the rules.

You're being uncharitable. I read it as a way for a person to prove they took the video, not as a database of person signing key. In other words, the government would only be able to see that video 123 was signed by signature 456. It would be up to the poster to prove they own the camera that produced signature 456.

So as long as you never post any video you made with that camera on any account that is not anonymous, you’re safe. In other words, completely impractical.

This is exactly why all these identifiers and all this tracking are harmful: you can never be anonymous, there’s always someone watching who can couple everything you do to your identity. And it happens with you knowing as little about it as possible.

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#328

> Authors and contributing developers assume no liability and are not responsible for any misuse or damage caused by the use of this program. Anything that can be created, will be created. However, that doesn't free you from all moral culpability. If you create something, make it freely accessible and easy to use, then I think you are partly responsible for its misuse. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have created…

this authentication mechanism is flawed and needs to go asap. these guys are doing something positive by speeding up the process.

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#329
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For nuclear weapons, even if plans were publicly available, getting the right kind of uranium would still be a major hurdle for 99.9% of the people.

But what if they weren't? What if one could create something with similar destructive force with materials easily accessible, and the only hurdle is knowledge of how to do so? It's honestly an interesting moral question.

No post body was provided.

Re: Deepfake Offensive Toolkit (real-time deepfakes for virtual cameras)

#330
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what are the consequences of the .1% of people who get over that hurdle?

Having something that can still be detected by most of the planet and making them very angry.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN