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

MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

xusheng.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 467 posts

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#41

Post by deadbabe »

hypfer wrote: post #37
sixothree wrote: post #6

I think it would be nice if all cameras digitally signed pictures. You could prove the photo was real.

I don't think that that's a good idea, because it implies trust when there actually isn't any. Being signed with something just means that whoever has that key could've done that. That might be the owner of a specific camera, but it might also be the camera manufacturer, anyone else in the supply chain, or anyone who dumped the key. Imagine fake evidence signed with the same key as your camera uses being used in cour…

Imagine today where a photo is submitted as evidence and the court believes it even without signatures.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#42

Post by jambalaya8 »

AaronAPU wrote: post #18
dotancohen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every generative AI model will watermark. Especially not adversarial and disinformation models.

So as usual, exactly the things you want it to work on it won’t.

I mean, workarounds wouldn't be hard, just annoying, anyway. Like an extra step or two (take a screenshot, change the image format, wipe the metadata; or print, take photo with camera, clean up in something like gimp, same other steps).

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#43

Post by hypfer »

deadbabe wrote: post #41
hypfer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that that's a good idea, because it implies trust when there actually isn't any. Being signed with something just means that whoever has that key could've done that. That might be the owner of a specific camera, but it might also be the camera manufacturer, anyone else in the supply chain, or anyone who dumped the key. Imagine fake evidence signed with the same key as your camera uses being used in cour…

Imagine today where a photo is submitted as evidence and the court believes it even without signatures.

Precisely. Now take that, but glue a "the machine has cryptographically proven that this is legit" to that.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#44

Post by avidruntime »

sixothree wrote: post #6

I think it would be nice if all cameras digitally signed pictures. You could prove the photo was real.

When I was in photography class in college, I created backplates in photoshop for still life portraits of small trinkets I was photographing. The photos were taken on black and white film and developed in the campus dark room. Led to some impressive photos. In our class's critiques, I explained how it was done. A lot of peers went from impressed to meh'd. The point: the black and white film laundered the new-age manipulation, and a digitally signed photo from a modern camera remains vulnerable to the same premise.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#45

Post by wzdd »

WalterGR wrote: post #12
sixothree wrote: post #6

I think it would be nice if all cameras digitally signed pictures. You could prove the photo was real.

What would prevent someone from applying the same algorithm on a computer to sign arbitrary images?

Or, you know, using the totally-real-picture camera to take a photo of an AI-generated scene?

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#46

Post by qurren »

cuu508 wrote: post #39
qurren wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> address Do not tell Microsoft where you sleep. IANAL but they are not a government or financial institution and do not have a right to that information. Make sure you register mailing addresses with your credit card institutions in addition to your residential addresses, and make your mailing address your billing address so that you aren't forced to tell a thousand businesses like Microsoft where you sleep.

> Make sure you register mailing addresses with your credit card institutions Sorry for a dumb question but what would one use as a mailing address? Rent a PO box, or use a mail forwarding service, something like that?

Any of a number of virtual mailbox services which can receive mail for you, e.g. anytimemailbox.com but there are several. You can either pick up in person, or they offer services like mail forwarding, opening and scanning, etc.

Besides privacy against leaking your sleeping-address to businesses, they're also convenient for avoiding package theft if that's a problem in your area, and receiving/forwarding mail if you travel a lot for extended periods of time.

I'd recommend against PO boxes because (1) they get rejected by some services (2) UPS and FedEx won't deliver to them.

Because these businesses have to register as CMRAs and you have to sign a notarized form for them to legally receive mail for you, some services will still detect it and not let you use the address, but my experience for the most part has been that most US financial institutions let you enter a "residential/legal address" (no CMRAs allowed) and a "mailing address" (CMRAs allowed) separately, and the mailing address usually becomes your billing address.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#47

Post by CamperBob2 »

sixothree wrote: post #6

I think it would be nice if all cameras digitally signed pictures. You could prove the photo was real.

"I think it would be nice if all pens added a unique isotopic tracer signature to their ink. You could tell exactly who wrote everything."

"I think it would be nice if all typewriters had their unique fine-detail type artifacts registered with the government. You could tell exactly who authored a given document."

I think it would be nice if you took these ideas back to Stalinist Russia where they belong.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#48

Post by gigel82 »

deadbabe wrote: post #38
gigel82 wrote: post #32

I'm honestly surprised they don't upload the entire image to apply the watermark server-side, to the point that I'd like someone else to repeat this investigation and confirm it's not happening. Shipping the watermark generator on user's machine would make it very easy for someone motivated to find how it works and write a "watermark remover".

It is already fairly trivial to write a universal watermark remover, an LLM can do it for you.

Without access to the code, I imagine it'd be extremely difficult even with unlimited API calls to the watermarker.

Re: MS Paint and Photos inivisibly watermark even locally generated output with GUID

#49

Post by ajjahs »

iAMkenough wrote: post #22
ixwt wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keys could be stored in something like TPM on Camera, and could sign the image. The key could then be verified from the camera itself to prove the authenticity of the image. If we as a society deemed it necessary, the camera manufacturer could also provide a list of keys for devices they have manufactured. And an image/key could be provided, and the manufacturer could verify the authenticity that way. The TPM signing…

If I steal your camera while you're on vacation, do I then gain proof of ownership of your photos? If I need to reset TPM, how do I reclaim photos I took previously?

[dead]
Post reply on HN