3 ms·
My cursory research into this topic (this morning...) lead me to believe inkjet printers may be uncompromised (not printing steganographic dots). The NYTimes be
by mattpavelle 9y ago
My cursory research into this topic (this morning...) lead me to believe inkjet printers may be uncompromised (not printing steganographic dots). The NYTimes believed this to be the case as well back in 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/technology/personaltech/24askk-001.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/technology/personaltech/24...) - anyone with more knowledge of the subject have information about this?
- schoen 9y agoI wrote the original article, and that consistently matches what we've learned and heard. However, that doesn't mean that forensics can never identify the printer that printed a document (there's an entire lab at Purdue that's been studying possible ways to do so for over a decade!), just that the printers are not intentionally engineered to track their users. Edit: It looks like the Purdue lab was only publishing research from 2003 to 2010, or hasn't updated its web site.
- CodeWriter23 9y agoSo they perfected it and received a gag order under the State Secrets Act.
- schoen 9y agoGood thing this country doesn't have a State Secrets Act! (Maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act if they filed for a patent.)
- CodeWriter23 9y agoThat's what I was referring to. Thanks for the clarification.