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

81–90 of 195 posts

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

#81

Post by thinkmassive »

rtkwe wrote: post #57
mc32 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t this a problem? Someone can take an actual clip of a speech but because it’s not signed by the speaker no matter how bad the speech, it could be declared inauthentic or deepfake because it has no signature? For example the whitehouse is known to revise the text of the president’s speeches when he says the wrong thing. If we only have officially released videos where the gaffes and fables are left out, how is an…

We don't have to live in the world where people are maximally naive (even if it seems so today). That also assumes there's not a signed video available of the event, usually things are recorded by more than one person especially a speech by the president. The biggest risk IMO is that key becomes immediately one of the most important secrets to keep since it holds the promise of validating anything you want to lie abo…

Signing keys can be derived from a root key that allows for rotation and revocation. Multiple keys can sign the same content.

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

#82

Post by e40 »

andrewinardeer wrote: post #69
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"

Looking at you Schwab.

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

#83

Post by nwoli »

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…

If I take a photo with a cryptographically signed camera of a polaroid containing an image that i deep faked, how does that ensure the image can be trusted?

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

#84

Post by jtbayly »

trust_bt_verify wrote: post #76
pessimizer wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

“ A federal district court in California dismissed the claims, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld that decision. The court of appeals ruled that although “it is possible to draw a causal line from the OEC’s flagging of the November 12th post to O’Handley’s suspension,” there was no “state action” for O’Handley to challenge under the First Amendment. California certainly exercised governmental au…

You didn't do a very good job trusting or verifying:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/supreme-court-co...

> The 5th Circuit appeals court saw things differently, finding that Biden administration "officials made express threats and, at the very least, leaned into the inherent authority of the President's office. The officials made inflammatory accusations, such as saying that the platforms were 'poison[ing]' the public, and 'killing people.' The platforms were told they needed to take greater responsibility and action. Then, they followed their statements with threats of 'fundamental reforms' like regulatory changes and increased enforcement actions that would ensure the platforms were 'held accountable.'... Given all of the above, we are left only with the conclusion that the officials' statements were coercive."

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

#85

Post by moomoo3000 »

nwoli wrote: post #83
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…

If I take a photo with a cryptographically signed camera of a polaroid containing an image that i deep faked, how does that ensure the image can be trusted?

Depth channel?

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

#86

Post by thfuran »

cj wrote: post #14
thfuran wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a really bad take. The difficulty of making many categories of lies is radically decreasing. That it has long been possible for a well-funded vfx team to do something doesn't mean nothing will change when it becomes possible for anyone with a cellphone and five minutes of free time to do the same thing.

> anyone with a cellphone and five minutes of free time One could argue that this will be a good thing because deep fakes will be so prevalent (e.g. kids making videos of their parents saying and doing funny things) that the default assumption is that everything is fake until proven not fake.

Why would that be a good thing?

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

#87

Post by EGG_CREAM »

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.

That is not really more likely. Most news outlets don't actually want to have a horrible reputation.

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

#88

Post by logicchains »

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.

[flagged]

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

#89

Post by 14 »

mu53 wrote: post #72
artursapek wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hacker News downvotes anything that makes them feel unsafe

Or are there groups that upvote/downvote content to groom a certain narrative?

There are not many sites around that don’t have this problem.

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

#90

Post by 14 »

rhplus wrote: post #34
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.

…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.

For sure but if they do it right it will make it hard enough and time consuming enough that only top actors can afford to do it.
Post reply on HN