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

NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

cisa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 195 posts

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#141

Post by squeaky-clean »

lazide wrote: post #59
rhplus wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…what the camera saw. Cameras can record screens. Perhaps adding a signed channel for depth and/or non-visible light would be the next step.

Currently difficult to display something a modern smartphone camera will not be able to distinguish from real, right? (Pixel artifacts, lighting too consistent, etc. right?).

It might be doable with an 8k TV and a source video with a lens-distortion applied to generate the opposite expected lens distortion of the crypto camera, so once it's recorded the perspective does not look like it is a recording of a flat video. Depth sensors would help with defeating that idea.

Or you could just smear some Vaseline on the lens and tell people the lens got dirty. It hurts the credibility for anyone who knows about these cameras but I doubt the public would think about it that much.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#142

Post by rightbyte »

dangerface wrote: post #17
rightbyte wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? How about not using unofficial channels for statements? I mean, what is new to this problem. Other than it is somewhat cheaper to pair the fake statement with the person responsible reading it out laud. Department press release -> Reuters -> News paper -> reader No signing required. The reader can verify the press release of he wants to.

What happens when the news paper just makes stuff up because they need a more click baity article? People click links on emails without verifying the sender what makes you think readers will track back through the chain you describe to verify anything? Don't roll your own authentication.

What happens is that the readers lose trust in the newspaper and reads another one.

I guess that is not a new problem either with lying newspapers.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#143

Post by rolobio »

hhmc wrote: post #80
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the problem with for-profit news outlets, they can't afford not to run the story that others are. State-run news outlets is also not good.

What's the solution? A powerful enough regulatory framework to fine (or otherwise punish) proven misinformation? Even then it's probably hard to prove that insufficient checking was performed at publication time

Perhaps ban them from receiving advertising revenue. Force them to go subscription only. Advertising revenue comes from clicks, not reads, we want people to actually read and contemplate. This is closer to what old-school newspapers did.

In theory, subscribers will leave outlets that lie to them for outlets that are more honest and fact-based. Or, if I'm pessimistic, subscribers will give money to whoever does rage-bait the best...

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#144

Post by Spellman »

cyrialize wrote: post #128
snoman wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a reference to the game Uplink?

It might be the reference to the movie Sneakers. The quote from Sneakers is: "My voice is my passport. Verify me."

Which then gets referenced/copied in Uplink as a homage.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#145

Post by EricE »

ethanbond wrote: post #98
vorpalhex wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legal issue is that they used the authority of the Whitehouse to do a "comply or there will be consequences". We've all sat through various crappy powerpoints on ethics. That is plain and simple coercion. That's a first amendment issue and prohibited.

One minor hiccup being that the allegedly coerced entities didn’t claim (and still haven’t claimed) to have been coerced.

Why coerce when you can pay for it? The FBI just paid Twitter to do their dirty work.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#146

Post by efitz »

Courts already have processes in place to challenge evidence; I’m not worried about them.

The problem with deepfakes is the instant amplification they’ll get from media and well-intentioned responses from people of good faith.

So there will be the deepfake of (insert your favorite politician) saying something unsavory and it’ll be taken at face value and a bunch of people will cancel their social media and bank accounts and protest in front of their houses etc etc.

The solution is super simple but unpalatable in today’s culture - waiting periods.

What if corporations were required by law to wait 30 days after a public spectacle before taking action? This would provide time for the victim to defend themselves and the truth to come out.

Similarly I have always thought that passing laws in the heat of the moment results in people’s rights being tramples. What if legislators were required to wait one year before passing laws in response to a public event of some sort? This would give time for passions to cool and alternatives to be considered and impacts to be weighed.

But this is all a pipe dream, let’s just cancel them immediately like we do now.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#147

Post by MadSudaca »

Capricorn2481 wrote: post #138
MadSudaca wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that you've gotten so many downvotes. The sad thing is that as things are progressing in the west, a large number of people won't have families or communities to lean on.

How so?

Fertility rates going down, divorce rates going up, and young people finding it harder to navigate dating and relationships. To the latter point, soon most new relationships will start through dating apps, and these have their share of problems too. These are some of the things that I think make finding companionship and building families harder.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#148

Post by fasterik »

pokstad wrote: post #109

We got lazy with the internet age. We’re going to have to go back to basic principles again. That means if you didn’t see it with your own eyes, it’s not real. If someone didn’t tell you in person, then they didn’t tell you. Maybe this won’t be a bad thing after all.

This is bad epistemology. I can't possibly verify all of the facts of physics, chemistry, biology, history, economics, medicine, law, politics, etc. through my own senses and through people that I know personally. It would be impossible to have any knowledge of the world that way.

The real solution is to carefully select a variety of experts who you trust as sources of information, and rely on the consensus of those experts to determine what is true, while maintaining a healthy level of skepticism.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#149

Post by rtkwe »

aqme28 wrote: post #121
rtkwe wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do get into issues because video files aren't just raw frames and haven't been for ages. Plus any changes on top of the video wouldn't just pass the frames through beyond the fact that current video encoding would reencode the embedded video when the larger video it was embedded in was exported. You'd have to add support for seamless passthrough of the original frames so the signatures could be validated plus som…

> video files aren't just raw frames and haven't been for ages. Does that really matter? You could sign keyframes, and then also sign the differences frame by frame til you get to the next keyframe.

You could but then that only really works for rehosting the exact same video. Most places would at least embed it in another video for commentary which would have a reencoding step that would wipe out the original video. See my other comments for more detail but it would require changing how we handle videos to preserve the signing info.

Re: NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats

#150

Post by aqme28 »

rtkwe wrote: post #149
aqme28 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> video files aren't just raw frames and haven't been for ages. Does that really matter? You could sign keyframes, and then also sign the differences frame by frame til you get to the next keyframe.

You could but then that only really works for rehosting the exact same video. Most places would at least embed it in another video for commentary which would have a reencoding step that would wipe out the original video. See my other comments for more detail but it would require changing how we handle videos to preserve the signing info.

That's a problem with embedding then, not with compression, right? Would embedding a raw video with commentary not also have the same problem?
Post reply on HN