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

Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

dkriesel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#31

Post by r4indeer »

masswerk wrote: post #21
r4indeer wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Xerox has admitted that the character substitution was enabled on all compression levels even though they claimed it was only active on one specific level. So theoretically, everyone who archived during that time using Xerox WorkCentres has to question their documents.

Which might be exactly, why nobody wants to talk about this. (This may be especially nasty where archives had been digitized and then the analog originals were disposed of. What can you even do about this?) PS: In order to have learned anything from this, there should be a rule for the digitization of archives containing core documents to use (at least) two unrelated scanning technologies, with unrelated processors a…

I'm pretty sure that Kriesel said in his C3 talk that at least one company called and told him that they scan and dispose of the originals. You can't do anything at this point. You're probably right – they rather just want to forget about it because the only correct solution would be to scrap everything.

My original comment was more aimed at the point that damage would need to be admitted. But they did admit it, which makes it evermore confusing why nothing really happened after that, at least publicly.

I don't think that TMR or similar overhead would be practical. Just ban compression algorithms that do pattern matching and substitution for archival purposes (like the German BSI did).

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#32

Post by j16sdiz »

fsh wrote: post #14
j16sdiz wrote: post #10

This is basically the same thing Samsung and friends doing to their camera app. Expect, in Samsung's case, some user love this.

No, it really isn't. Xerox had a bug in the image compression algorithm. Smartphones use neural networks and multiple exposures to achieve picture quality far beyond what the hardware is capable of. This is very different technology for a very different purpose.

It is the same "let's use image from something else to fill in this gap and hope nobody would notice" mindset.

xerox use image snippets from same document, samsung use something the their "AI" made up. Both of them are trying to be smart and replace stuffs with something "similar"

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#33

Post by azalemeth »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #24
lynx23 wrote: post #8

Even though this happened a long time ago, whenever I hear or think about it, I am a mazed that it didn't put Xerox out of business, or at least hurt a little more. After all, some big players were already doing digital archiving at the time. :-/ BTW, the CCC had a pretty neat presentation at that time as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo

PRISM didn't kill companies, Apple home button scandal didn't touch it, sony infecting its users with a rootkit didn't make it sell less playstations, HP lying cartridges had no impact on its long term business... Fines and green washing are budgeted and only a small fractions of the profit they make by misbehaving. On this very site you can read regularly people telling you we should forget about the MS of the past…

I guess part of the problem with boycotts is that it's very hard to know who will not buy your product because of e.g DRM, and who won't buy it because they're not interested in it.

I haven't bought a single Sony product since the rootkit fiasco, but I've never been able to tell them this directly. I don't buy products with DRM in them. I just don't. I'm not going to be appearing in the balance sheet, however, and won't appear in the calculus of lost growth for an MBA.

The only time I think boycotts do work is when they cause a direct negative action to a company's bottom line that is sufficiently obvious that an accountant can see it. Long, slow protests -- such as exist against Nestlé for example -- are worthy but likely for the birds.

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#34

Post by BiteCode_dev »

azalemeth wrote: post #33
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PRISM didn't kill companies, Apple home button scandal didn't touch it, sony infecting its users with a rootkit didn't make it sell less playstations, HP lying cartridges had no impact on its long term business... Fines and green washing are budgeted and only a small fractions of the profit they make by misbehaving. On this very site you can read regularly people telling you we should forget about the MS of the past…

I guess part of the problem with boycotts is that it's very hard to know who will not buy your product because of e.g DRM, and who won't buy it because they're not interested in it. I haven't bought a single Sony product since the rootkit fiasco, but I've never been able to tell them this directly. I don't buy products with DRM in them. I just don't. I'm not going to be appearing in the balance sheet, however, and wo…

Oh they have an entire department dedicated to understand what people think about each product, so they would know.

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#36

Post by masswerk »

sofixa wrote: post #23
masswerk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which might be exactly, why nobody wants to talk about this. (This may be especially nasty where archives had been digitized and then the analog originals were disposed of. What can you even do about this?) PS: In order to have learned anything from this, there should be a rule for the digitization of archives containing core documents to use (at least) two unrelated scanning technologies, with unrelated processors a…

> In order to have learned anything from this, there should be a rule for the digitization of archives containing core documents to use (at least) two unrelated scanning technologies, with unrelated processors and unrelated software from different sources But what do you do in case of conflict? There's no way of resolving it, so for this type of thing to be more effective, you'd need 3 different scans, and a quorum o…

Knowing that the data is unreliable is something already. Then, you can apply heuristics. And, if there is a systematic error, you should be able to detect this, eventually. (E.g., what is the unreliable series, what is the bug and when is it triggered?) But, yeah, this is why I wrote "at least".

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#37

Post by m3affan »

lynx23 wrote: post #8

Even though this happened a long time ago, whenever I hear or think about it, I am a mazed that it didn't put Xerox out of business, or at least hurt a little more. After all, some big players were already doing digital archiving at the time. :-/ BTW, the CCC had a pretty neat presentation at that time as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo

This was an amazing talk. He did a great job keeping it entertaining.

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#38

Post by masswerk »

r4indeer wrote: post #31
masswerk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which might be exactly, why nobody wants to talk about this. (This may be especially nasty where archives had been digitized and then the analog originals were disposed of. What can you even do about this?) PS: In order to have learned anything from this, there should be a rule for the digitization of archives containing core documents to use (at least) two unrelated scanning technologies, with unrelated processors a…

I'm pretty sure that Kriesel said in his C3 talk that at least one company called and told him that they scan and dispose of the originals. You can't do anything at this point. You're probably right – they rather just want to forget about it because the only correct solution would be to scrap everything. My original comment was more aimed at the point that damage would need to be admitted. But they did admit it, whic…

There's a scene in the Cryptonomicon, where Goto Dengo's (a lieutenant in the Japanese Imperial Army in WWII) convoy is sunk by a US air attack. This involves a new weapon, which also requires a crucial change in tactics – and he knows that the Imperial Army has lost the war: this is not how the Americans are supposed to attack, how could this happen? Notably, this requires that several high ranking figures observe, comprehend and admit that their tactics are ineffective, that they are wrong – and invent and implement something new and adjust their tactics, instead, involving the entire chain of command. This shouldn't happen. They must have all killed themselves. No warrior of principles would admit to such a fault, commit to the shame, and change tactics in the midst of the war…

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#39

Post by berkeleyjunk »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #24
lynx23 wrote: post #8

Even though this happened a long time ago, whenever I hear or think about it, I am a mazed that it didn't put Xerox out of business, or at least hurt a little more. After all, some big players were already doing digital archiving at the time. :-/ BTW, the CCC had a pretty neat presentation at that time as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0O6UXrOZJo

PRISM didn't kill companies, Apple home button scandal didn't touch it, sony infecting its users with a rootkit didn't make it sell less playstations, HP lying cartridges had no impact on its long term business... Fines and green washing are budgeted and only a small fractions of the profit they make by misbehaving. On this very site you can read regularly people telling you we should forget about the MS of the past…

I can see the other things but "Apple home button scandal" either does not belong in the same league or there might be something I do not know about. Can you expand a little bit on your thinking?

Re: Xerox scanners randomly alter numbers in scanned documents (2013)

#40

Post by HPsquared »

masswerk wrote: post #38
r4indeer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that Kriesel said in his C3 talk that at least one company called and told him that they scan and dispose of the originals. You can't do anything at this point. You're probably right – they rather just want to forget about it because the only correct solution would be to scrap everything. My original comment was more aimed at the point that damage would need to be admitted. But they did admit it, whic…

There's a scene in the Cryptonomicon, where Goto Dengo's (a lieutenant in the Japanese Imperial Army in WWII) convoy is sunk by a US air attack. This involves a new weapon, which also requires a crucial change in tactics – and he knows that the Imperial Army has lost the war: this is not how the Americans are supposed to attack, how could this happen? Notably, this requires that several high ranking figures observe,…

Given that science progresses one funeral at a time, the practice of seppuku would seem to allow the Imperial Japanese officer corps to evolve their tactics more rapidly than most.
Post reply on HN