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

331–340 of 467 posts

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

#331

Post by SuperGent »

benterix wrote: post #305
weberer wrote: post #24

The AI aspect of this is a red herring. The real problem is that they're secretly adding in a unique identifier into every image you create. If somebody does not like your meme, they can just send a copyright subpoena to Microsoft to instantly get your full name, address, email, phone number, and any other data associated with your Microsoft account. Just like age verification, this is another weapon in the war again…

> Microsoft to instantly get your full name, address, email, phone number, and any other data associated with your Microsoft account. Provided you bent the knee and created a Microsoft account.

Assuming you are on windows, you probably have

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

#333

Post by [deleted] »

alex_duf wrote: post #327
mg794613 wrote: post #321

My goodness, this has nothing to do with AI problems. I don't understand that people still buy an OS from a company that actively hates it's customers. The amount of things they pull should not even be succesful on a OS you get paid FOR to use.

Not that I love Microsoft, but they would get a lot of heat if they let anybody generate harmful content as well. They can't win on that topic. Now I would not want to appear to defend the mess they've created out of windows, that's not the point.

[deleted]

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

#334

Post by account42 »

arjie wrote: post #19
WalterGR wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Presumably the OP is proposing something like a TPM attached to the image sensor that signs the sensor output or something like that. You can’t sign it because you can’t get the key out. The key could be per-camera and be a published list. I suppose a dedicated fraudster could still stage an appropriate scene. An appropriately lit matte image might even suffice.

At the very least there is always the analog hole where you point the camera at a sufficiently high quality screen. The sensor can't tell whether the light it receives was emitted by sunlight reflecting (and refracting) from someone's face or by a bunch of LEDs pointed at the sensor.

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

#336

Post by account42 »

Retr0id wrote: post #99
BeetleB wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly would this work? People take RAW photos. Load it up in a RAW editing tool. Manipulate it. Then load it in Gimp. Manipulate some more. Will the final result have the signature? And if it does, what use would it be?

In the imaginary dream world that Adobe, Google et al live in, the final file does indeed have a signature. Each piece of software in the chain must use TPM-like technologies (yes, even GIMP) to make sure it's running a "legitimate" build of the software, on "legitimate" hardware, and re-sign the file at each step along the way (using keys provisioned during some flavour of remote attestation flow, or using a RA-auth…

I can't wait for poking memory of applications running on my computer to become a felony.

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

#337

Post by account42 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #47
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.

Stalinist Russia? Stalin would be absolutely dumbfounded by the level of tracking common in the west today.

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

#340

Post by shuwix »

davidwritesbugs wrote: post #298
Rendello wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's very likely your printer is secretly adding marks to the page It's most likely how the FBI caught NSA leaker Reality Winner: > Both journalists and security experts have suggested that The Intercept's handling of the documents, which included publishing the documents unredacted and including the printer tracking dots, was used to identify Winner as the leaker. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner

This seems like something that could be confirmed by reverse engineering a printer’s firmware? Surely someone has done that?

You don't need reverse engineering if it's publicly known fact for 20+ years, telemetry just identifies you. 20 years ago, you would need to find the printer.
Post reply on HN