Fawkes: Image “Cloaking” for Personal Privacy

Post by nl » Thu, Jul 23, 2020, 6:11 AM UTC

cookiecaper wrote: post #103

akersten wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair shake, this time I cropped the image too so that it wasn't looking at any of the boundary to identify it either. Here's the original image: https://imgur.com/a/Td4rhoy And the cloaked: https://imgur.com/a/cPCiCZo These were both saved as JPG with compression level 8/12. I searched for the cloaked crop (96.jpg) first this time: https://imgur.com/a/FSehQWO And the original crop (10.jpg) next: https://imgur.com/a/y…

The goal, afaik, is to stop facial detection software from learning to recognize you and put a face to a name, not to frustrate visual similarity searches. The images are supposed to be visually similar -- so similar that they're indistinguishable to a human viewer. Surveillance software that purports to accurately identify a person across multiple images is not just looking for the same content with some visually in…

Post by nxpnsv » Thu, Jul 23, 2020, 10:34 AM UTC

sszz wrote: post #64

nxpnsv wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a problem there that your pics are already out and you can no longer update them....

If you use a new cloaking image for each picture you upload to social then they will all be embedded in a different location for a given feature extractor and an adversary wouldn’t be able to reverse search for linked pictures—that’s at least my understanding of how the method would need to be used. But if you keep using the same cloaking image, your adversary could definitely learn that process and effectively undo…

Post by throwaway189262 » Thu, Jul 23, 2020, 12:18 PM UTC

akersten wrote: post #91

woah wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the linked article: Q: Can't you just apply some filter, or compression, or blurring algorithm, or add some noise to the image to destroy image cloaks? A: As counterintuitive as this may be, the high level answer is no simple tools work to destroy the perturbation that form image cloaks. To make sense of this, it helps to first understand that Fawkes does not use high-intensity pixels, or rely on bright patterns…

It was pretty frustrating that they did not readily offer any example images for inspection, so against my better judgement I downloaded their binaries to run some experiements. First, a source image at an approximate resolution that you might find on a social networking site: https://imgur.com/a/9szcC1m Text output of the tool, which ran for about 3 minutes: https://imgur.com/a/fZtfrmm The resulting cloaked image: h…

Post by im3w1l » Thu, Jul 23, 2020, 3:07 PM UTC

akersten wrote: post #91

woah wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the linked article: Q: Can't you just apply some filter, or compression, or blurring algorithm, or add some noise to the image to destroy image cloaks? A: As counterintuitive as this may be, the high level answer is no simple tools work to destroy the perturbation that form image cloaks. To make sense of this, it helps to first understand that Fawkes does not use high-intensity pixels, or rely on bright patterns…

It was pretty frustrating that they did not readily offer any example images for inspection, so against my better judgement I downloaded their binaries to run some experiements. First, a source image at an approximate resolution that you might find on a social networking site: https://imgur.com/a/9szcC1m Text output of the tool, which ran for about 3 minutes: https://imgur.com/a/fZtfrmm The resulting cloaked image: h…

Post by moon2 » Thu, Jul 23, 2020, 8:11 PM UTC