NSA, FBI, and CISA Release Cybersecurity Information Sheet on Deepfake Threats • Hacker News Board

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

#91

Post by gadders » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 1:48 PM UTC

dudefeliciano wrote: post #79

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…

I always have to think of the Wu Ming Foundation/former Luther Blisset collective and their fake news/LARPing missions[1] that showed how easy it was to fool major news outlets back in the 90s. Too bad that now those same techniques have been weaponized with great success. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Blissett_(pseudonym)#Li...

See also the Daily Mirror and Piers Morgan: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/may/15/mirror.politic...

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

#92

Post by whatamidoingyo » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 1:52 PM UTC

shrubble wrote: post #13

Images and video that goes against the approved government and/or media narratives == 'deepfake' .

I worry about this. It's already quite difficult getting to the truth of something - every political party essentially flinging shit at each other with accusations of lies.

At this point, giving up entirely on any form of media seems appealing.

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

#93

Post by superkuh » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:01 PM UTC

There are no deepfake threats. Deepfakes is just the hype word for digitally altering photos/videos. In the past doing this well was restricted to governments, large corporations, large institutions. And they did it regularly. Now individual human people can do it themselves. That's good. That's not bad in any form or manner.

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

#94

Post by AlecSchueler » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:02 PM UTC

moomoo3000 wrote: post #85

nwoli wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I've seen pretty good depth estimation algorithms that work off of 2D images, even without the use of AI.

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

#95

Post by DharmaPolice » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:07 PM UTC

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

I must admit I found that element of the story...surprising. Has realtime faking gotten that good yet? Presumably there was back and forth in this call so this person was either disguising their voice or typing responses to be generated on the fly.

I know all this can be done, I'm just surprised it's reached the maturity where an attacker would choose to impersonate someone the call recipient presumably knew vs just being a vague "Bob from IT".

Although to be fair the article does say the employee was suspicious so maybe there was a delay which (if you were looking for it) you would spot.

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

#96

Post by gadders » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:08 PM UTC

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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

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

#97

Post by dylan604 » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:09 PM UTC

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…

>I'm old enough to remember back in 2005

How to make someone feel old. All the way back to 2005, eh?

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

#98

Post by ethanbond » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:13 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #77

rtkwe wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

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

#99

Post by thieving_magpie » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:15 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #77

rtkwe wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

I haven't looked into this issue in detail and was surprised to see such a brazen threat so I wanted to find information on your quote "comply or there will be consequences". I'm not able to see that in the context of white house or twitter. I haven't found anything close to it yet.

Could you point me to that information?

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

#100

Post by DrThunder » Tue, Sep 26, 2023, 2:16 PM UTC

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.

The government even ASKING about accounts and when they're going to be removed or censored is a clear violation of the 1st amendment. Whether it was done every single time they asked is irrelevant. One time is more than enough. Nothing is getting blow up, you just don't like the information you're getting because it goes against the team you're rooting for.

I don't want a government or DOJ in place that allows me to have my 1st amendment rights "most of the time" except the times they don't like me having it. Are you serious with this comment?