To uncover a deepfake video call, ask the caller to turn sideways

Post by tacocataco » Mon, Aug 08, 2022, 10:12 PM UTC

notahacker wrote: post #142

sroussey wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Now they have the data to deep fake you turning your head. I hope they delete the data immediately after use.

Frankly, of all the personally identifying data I share with my bank, a low resolution phone video of the side of my head is the least worrying. It's like worrying the government knows my mum's maiden name! In the eventuality that robust deepfake technology to provide fluid real-time animation of my head from limited data sources exists and someone actually wants to use it against me, they can probably find video con…

Post by williamscales » Mon, Aug 08, 2022, 10:21 PM UTC

technothrasher wrote: post #130

Strom wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a current limitation The thing with any AI/ML tech is that current limitations are always underplayed by proponents. Self-driving cars will come out next year, every year. I'd say that until the tech actually exists, this is a great way to detect live deepfakes. Not using the technique just because maybe sometime in the future it won't work isn't very sound. For an extreme opponent you may need additional s…

It sounded to me like the parent poster wasn't saying not to use it, but simply that it cannot be relied upon. In other words, a deepfake could fail a 'turn sideways' test and that would be useful, but you shouldn't rely on a 'passing' test.

Post by Gigachad » Mon, Aug 08, 2022, 10:51 PM UTC

pclmulqdq wrote: post #169

Strom wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a current limitation The thing with any AI/ML tech is that current limitations are always underplayed by proponents. Self-driving cars will come out next year, every year. I'd say that until the tech actually exists, this is a great way to detect live deepfakes. Not using the technique just because maybe sometime in the future it won't work isn't very sound. For an extreme opponent you may need additional s…

The only person who is promising self driving cars next year (and has done so every year for the past 5 years) is Elon Musk. Most respectable self-driving car companies are both further along than Tesla and more realistic about their timelines.

Post by neximo64 » Mon, Aug 08, 2022, 10:56 PM UTC

sbszllr wrote: post #18

Source: I work in the field. This is a current limitation, and an artifact of the data+method but not something that should be relied upon. If we do some adversary modelling, we can find two ways to work around this: 1) actively generate and search for such data; perhaps expensive for small actors but not well equipped malicious ones. 2) wait for deep learning to catch up, e.g. by extending NERFs (neural radiance fie…

Post by itake » Mon, Aug 08, 2022, 11:34 PM UTC

ballenf wrote: post #114

mike_hearn wrote: post #112

Long term, the only robust way to solve this is going to involve a remote attestation chain i.e. video that's being signed by the web cam as it's produced, and then transformed/recompressed inside e.g. SGX enclaves or an SEV protected virtual machine that's sending an RA to the other side. Although hard to set up (you need a lot of people to cooperate and CPU vendors have to bring these features back to consumer hard…

Then you just point the webcam at a screen or microphone at a speaker? I really don't think moving our trust to unknown, unnamed manufacturers of hardware in far away places is a solution. The solution is not going to be high tech, imho. Just like we have learned a skepticism resulting from Photoshop, we'll learn a skepticism of live video or audio.