The algorithm that the author is painfully searching by brute-forcing a picture is hidden by simply compilation. Decompilation of a binary was hard in the 20th century, not so much now. Discovering the exact algorithm only requires some time and some skills.
How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
101–110 of 122 posts
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#102When I was in college (99-2000ish, maybe?), one of my roommates was an art major with a graphic design bent, and he had this high end printer and would copy and print $1 bills and take 20 at a time over to the vending machines around the corner from our apartments once a week or so. After about a month of doing this, the machines disappeared. Of course, he's the same roommate who later got arrested for wire fraud and…
Similar. A friend of mine used an epson stylus printer (new on the market then) and a scanner to copy £20 notes. They were inserted into the change machine in the local gambling arcade type place. It was stupid enough to accept a single sided copy. Out popped pound coins. He now works for GCHQ which is funny. Edit: just to add that these change machines were really naff and obviously built by the lowest bidder.
> He now works for GCHQ which is funny.
So he just moved on to even more serious crimes.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar. A friend of mine used an epson stylus printer (new on the market then) and a scanner to copy £20 notes. They were inserted into the change machine in the local gambling arcade type place. It was stupid enough to accept a single sided copy. Out popped pound coins. He now works for GCHQ which is funny. Edit: just to add that these change machines were really naff and obviously built by the lowest bidder.
NAFF - At first I decided that it stood for 'Not Anything Fucking Fancy' then I googled it and realized its british slang:' https://www.google.com/search?q=naff
"realized" - at first I thought you couldn't spell, but then I googled it and realised that you're an American.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because my software should never tell me that I can't do something for non-technical reasons. Assuming I'm a criminal is wrong. If I was a criminal, breaking the law is my decision, and my software should not impede my ability to do so.
Furthermore, criminals are usually motivated enough to find something else that will do the job. The Photoshop anti-counterfeiting stuff? It just scares off amateurs with an inkjet who don't realize every page from their printer has a tiny coded tracking mark that identifies the printer, date, and time.
> every page from their printer has a tiny coded tracking mark that identifies the printer, date, and time.
Another argument for free software.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#105On a related note: many colour printers leave a tiny encoded pattern on each page (based on model/serial/etc), ostensibly to help track counterfeiters. [1] [2] Unfortunately, they're printed all the time. [1] https://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-d... [2] https://www.eff.org/issues/printers
Perhaps also for forensics in case of other crimes as well.
The main use is to identify leakers.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#106This has been around for a lot longer then the article (from 2009) suggests. High end publishing printers had a lock-down mechanism built in as early as the late 90's when you attempted to print US currency.
As mentioned in this comment thread, there is a general description of the security features on newmoney.gov - while I was working on the original version of newmoney.gov for the release of the new $20 bill, we were given high DPI scans of the new bill and were only allowed to make low DPI, specific crops - all while in a "war room" that did not have internet access nor were we allowed to bring in any cameras or cellphones.
Some interesting little facts I was told while working with the BEP: most counterfeits are actually done by other countries with proper currency printing machines. Small time counterfeiting is generally bleached out $1 bills printed over with $5 images to retain the same cotton-paper ratio used so that it feels the same.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#107If this software is detecting currency, the obvious follow-up question we should ask is: what else is it detecting, how does it do this, and why? Could it be that each image generated from Adobe Software also tags the image with unique identifying computer, timestamp information?
Given that Adobe is attempting to move their software over to their Creative Cloud service, then that is probably quite possible now. Beyond that, I think the bigger threat to privacy by far in digital images is in EXIF data and reverse image searches.
Yup, that + what happens when it crashes? I wonder, if a network packet is sent somewhere.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar. A friend of mine used an epson stylus printer (new on the market then) and a scanner to copy £20 notes. They were inserted into the change machine in the local gambling arcade type place. It was stupid enough to accept a single sided copy. Out popped pound coins. He now works for GCHQ which is funny. Edit: just to add that these change machines were really naff and obviously built by the lowest bidder.
> He now works for GCHQ which is funny. So he just moved on to even more serious crimes.
Yep. Considering the recent news etc, he is the proverbial laughing stock.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
NAFF - At first I decided that it stood for 'Not Anything Fucking Fancy' then I googled it and realized its british slang:' https://www.google.com/search?q=naff
"realized" - at first I thought you couldn't spell, but then I googled it and realised that you're an American.
Look it up and you'll _realize_ that "realise" is the non-Oxford English spelling, and the Oxford English spelling is realize.
It's the same with many words with the -ize suffix - we seem to have subconsciously accepted -ise to the point that spellcheckers demand it, when in actual fact the OED form of a word typically uses -ize.
Most British newspapers use the -ise form. The Oxford University Press use the -ize form. So it isn't as clear cut as you think.
I recall reading that the -ise alternatives have some roots in Australian us of the language.
Re: How printers and Photoshop detect and refuse to process images of currency
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
"realized" - at first I thought you couldn't spell, but then I googled it and realised that you're an American.
Look it up and you'll _realize_ that "realise" is the non-Oxford English spelling, and the Oxford English spelling is realize. It's the same with many words with the -ize suffix - we seem to have subconsciously accepted -ise to the point that spellcheckers demand it, when in actual fact the OED form of a word typically uses -ize. Most British newspapers use the -ise form. The Oxford University Press use the -ize form…
I am aware of the OUP's stance on -ize. My little dig at the commenter's parochialism would not have been enhanced by a exploration of the nooks & crannies of International English.