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

61–70 of 195 posts

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

#61

Post by yomlica8 »

artursapek wrote: post #40
nicce wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are already coming cameras which sign the data on the fly with help of hardware security modules. Only that can be truly verifiable. Adding signature after recording works to certain degree, but it still does not guarantee that the content is what the camera saw.

Really?? I imagined this product but thought there must be some reason it’s a bad idea

It could be used to hunt down reporters and whistleblowers if the cameras have to be purchased with an ID. So the very people who would benefit might be forced to strip this extra data to protect themselves.

I wonder if you could use the camera to record deepfaked video and in effect bless a lie. Even just filming a TV set might be enough for low grade blackmail and much more complicated methods are available.

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

#62

Post by pessimizer »

rtkwe wrote: post #49
tomohawk wrote: post #42

These are some of the very same government entities that were caught working with their surrogates at social media companies to censor speech that they declared misinformation. In their vernacular, misinformation may be 100% true information that goes against the narrative that they want to promote.

This again? They pointed out posts they believed violated places like Twitter's TOS and in the case of Twitter most of the time Twitter left them up and took no action against the material. A pretty shoddy censorship campaign in my opinion, it was blown up by Elon and the partisan actors he released the data to to support a political point they've been griping about for ages.

> This again?

You're talking about something that has been ruled by two courts as a massive first amendment violation, and is heading to the Supreme Court (if they even want it), as if it were a conspiracy theory.

And what political point are you even talking about, where do you learn to use this tone about serious issues, and why the fixation on celebrities like Musk?

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

#63

Post by Ialdaboth »

stainablesteel wrote: post #50
tomohawk wrote: post #42

These are some of the very same government entities that were caught working with their surrogates at social media companies to censor speech that they declared misinformation. In their vernacular, misinformation may be 100% true information that goes against the narrative that they want to promote.

this story writes itself like a children's book "beware of false information" said the people who keep the biggest secrets

By the way, notice how they pivoted from "false information" to "misinformation" years ago. It's transparently hilarious.

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

#64

Post by patwolf »

I'm old enough to remember back in 2005 when terrorist in Iraq claimed to be holding a US soldier hostage, and it turned out the whole thing was staged using photos of a doll:

Original story: https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/02/world/africa/rebels-say-t... Confirmation of hoax: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6894934

It's pretty easy to see that the photo is a hoax, but many news outlets didn't notice and ran the story anyway.

I have little faith in our ability to detect deepfakes using these recommendations. It seems we'll have to assume something is fake unless we have a way to cryptographically verify its provenience.

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

#65

Post by [deleted] »

Ialdaboth wrote: post #63
stainablesteel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this story writes itself like a children's book "beware of false information" said the people who keep the biggest secrets

By the way, notice how they pivoted from "false information" to "misinformation" years ago. It's transparently hilarious.

[deleted]

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

#66

Post by ejb999 »

patwolf wrote: post #64

I'm old enough to remember back in 2005 when terrorist in Iraq claimed to be holding a US soldier hostage, and it turned out the whole thing was staged using photos of a doll: Original story: https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/02/world/africa/rebels-say-t... Confirmation of hoax: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6894934 It's pretty easy to see that the photo is a hoax, but many news outlets didn't notice and ran the story…

>>It's pretty easy to see that the photo is a hoax, but many news outlets didn't notice and ran the story anyway.

More likely: many news outlets didn't CARE and ran the story anyway.

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

#67

Post by nicce »

rtkwe wrote: post #55
nicce wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For editing it does not matter if you just remove or move frames. Video is just a series frames and each of them are signed, each frame can be validated if the content is unmodified. If the same root key is used for another stream, then frames can be combined easily. I don't know audio well enough how it happens there. But potentially it can be signed in chunks as well. Of course, one needs to consider risks if editi…

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…

Let's say that camera records in 60fps. Maybe all the data on all the channels can be recorded in chunks of 1/60s and signed separated. Then camera combines it as whole playable video, but then there is a separate metadata for each time/byte offset which have been signed.

At the beginning, camera manufacturers might need to provide their own editors, to make editing possible. How much we can trust the camera holders, if the editor software even allows using the key from the camera for better editing in certain limits?

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

#68

Post by ejb999 »

tomohawk wrote: post #42

These are some of the very same government entities that were caught working with their surrogates at social media companies to censor speech that they declared misinformation. In their vernacular, misinformation may be 100% true information that goes against the narrative that they want to promote.

Not just 'working with' - demanding what speech should be taken down, AND paying them to do it.

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

#69

Post by andrewinardeer »

1MachineElf wrote: post #52

A recently announced breach at Retool[0] involved the use of a deepfake version of an IT employee's voice for social engineering. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37500895

"My voice is my password"

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

#70

Post by Cthulhu_ »

ejb999 wrote: post #66
patwolf wrote: post #64

I'm old enough to remember back in 2005 when terrorist in Iraq claimed to be holding a US soldier hostage, and it turned out the whole thing was staged using photos of a doll: Original story: https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/02/world/africa/rebels-say-t... Confirmation of hoax: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6894934 It's pretty easy to see that the photo is a hoax, but many news outlets didn't notice and ran the story…

>>It's pretty easy to see that the photo is a hoax, but many news outlets didn't notice and ran the story anyway. More likely: many news outlets didn't CARE and ran the story anyway.

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.
Post reply on HN