Live data from Hacker News

Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

wired.com

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#11
post #5
post #4

People have been trying to watermark digital media for decades, when there was (still is) a very strong financial incentive to get it working. It never worked. I don’t think it ever will work.

“Information wants to be free.”

More like, "people want to steal information"

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#12
We already have well established systems to prove the provenance of images and other sources.

At the moment the internet is a wash with bullshit images. Its imperative that news outlets are at a high enough standard to actually prove the provenance of them.

You don't trust some bloke off facebook asserting that something is true, its the same for images.

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#13
post #8

For written text, the problem may be even harder. Identifying the human author of text is a field called "stylometry" but this result shows that some simple transformations reduce the success to random chance [1]. Similarly, I suspect watermarking LLM output is probably unworkable. The output of a smart model could be de-watermarked by fine tuning a dumb open source model on the initial output, and then regenerating…

Also, most stylometry work isn't well fitted to active attempts to forge another author, and is more about distinguishing authorship in works with uncertain attribution.

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#14
post #10

We need to focus on the other direction. How can we have chains of trust for content creation, such as for real video. Content can be faked, but not necessarily easily faked from the same sources that make use of cryptographic signing. The attacks can sign the own work, so you'd need ways to distinguish those cases, but device level keys, organizational keys, distribution keys all can provide provenance chains that c…

"Magnetic anomalies are generally a small fraction of the magnetic field. The total field ranges from 25,000 to 65,000 nanoteslas (nT). To measure anomalies, magnetometers need a sensitivity of 10 nT or less."

Would signing content with a cryptographically consistent encoding of this field be workable?

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#16
Wasn't this obvious from the get go that this can't work?

If AI will eventually generate say 10k by 10k images, I can resize to 2.001k by 1.999k or similar, and I just don't get how any subtle signal in the pixels can persist through that.

Maybe you could do something at the compositional level, but that seems restrictive to the output. Maybe something about like larger regions average color balance or something? But you wouldn't be able to fit many bits in there, especially when you need to avoid triggering accidentally.

Also: here are some play money markets for whether this will work:

https://manifold.markets/Ernie/midjourney-images-can-be-effe...

https://manifold.markets/Ernie/openai-images-have-a-useful-a...

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#17
post #10

We need to focus on the other direction. How can we have chains of trust for content creation, such as for real video. Content can be faked, but not necessarily easily faked from the same sources that make use of cryptographic signing. The attacks can sign the own work, so you'd need ways to distinguish those cases, but device level keys, organizational keys, distribution keys all can provide provenance chains that c…

I was thinking the other day about embedding keys in cameras, etc. but came up with the problem that you could just wire up a computer that BEHAVES like a CCD sensor and send whatever the hell you feel like in to the signing hardware, so you feed in your fake image and it gets signed by the camera as though it were real. I assume smarter people than me have put much more time into the problem, so I'd be interested to see any good resources on the subject.

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#18
post #10

We need to focus on the other direction. How can we have chains of trust for content creation, such as for real video. Content can be faked, but not necessarily easily faked from the same sources that make use of cryptographic signing. The attacks can sign the own work, so you'd need ways to distinguish those cases, but device level keys, organizational keys, distribution keys all can provide provenance chains that c…

The cryptography to support this has been around for ever and it's been next to impossible to make the decision makers at companies and large organizations care, much less end users.

Small time players like GE routinely fail to correctly sign industrial control software, the odds of people recording video paying enough attention to get it right and the meme crowd bothering to check even if they did seems vanishingly small without a lot of educational effort.

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#19
post #17
post #10

We need to focus on the other direction. How can we have chains of trust for content creation, such as for real video. Content can be faked, but not necessarily easily faked from the same sources that make use of cryptographic signing. The attacks can sign the own work, so you'd need ways to distinguish those cases, but device level keys, organizational keys, distribution keys all can provide provenance chains that c…

I was thinking the other day about embedding keys in cameras, etc. but came up with the problem that you could just wire up a computer that BEHAVES like a CCD sensor and send whatever the hell you feel like in to the signing hardware, so you feed in your fake image and it gets signed by the camera as though it were real. I assume smarter people than me have put much more time into the problem, so I'd be interested to…

I think you'd need device levels keys. You couldn't trust any particular image ... but you could perhaps know where it came from, which you gives you a better substrate upon which to infer trust.

Re: Researchers tested AI watermarks and broke all of them

#20
post #10

We need to focus on the other direction. How can we have chains of trust for content creation, such as for real video. Content can be faked, but not necessarily easily faked from the same sources that make use of cryptographic signing. The attacks can sign the own work, so you'd need ways to distinguish those cases, but device level keys, organizational keys, distribution keys all can provide provenance chains that c…

The cryptography to support this has been around for ever and it's been next to impossible to make the decision makers at companies and large organizations care, much less end users. Small time players like GE routinely fail to correctly sign industrial control software, the odds of people recording video paying enough attention to get it right and the meme crowd bothering to check even if they did seems vanishingly…

Yeah, you need adoption for it to work, and that in tern means there needs to be some kind of financial or regulatory incentive. But it does seem to me to be more technically feasible. Fingerprinting AI seems ... just not workable at this point.

We are starting to see adoption of software supply-chains with SBOMS, albeit imperfectly. We are starting to see increased adoption of things like DMARC in the email space to better authentic the originator of an email. Both are highly imperfect systems ... but you can start kludging something together ... and if the incentives are there I think you can build out more of a workable system.

Post reply on HN