3 ms·
I wonder if they're doing anything to take into account tiny modifications causing a completely different hash, or if they are relying on users not knowing that
by wlll 9y ago
I wonder if they're doing anything to take into account tiny modifications causing a completely different hash, or if they are relying on users not knowing that changing an image would get around a naieve hashing strategy.
- wallace_f 9y agoThey don't care how bad the strategy is. The goal isn't to combat revenge porn, albeit that is a noble goal, and one that individual actors will care about. The goal here is to partner with governments, 3-letter agencies and others to condition people to accept ideas about their privacy rights that we would normally find exceedingly objectionable.
- andreareina 9y agoFTA (emphasis mine): > The technology was first developed in 2009 by Microsoft, working closely with Dartmouth and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to clamp down on the same images of sexually abused children being circulated over and over again on the internet. There was technology that could find exact matches of images, but abusers could get around this by slightly altering the files – either by changing their size or adding a small mark. > PhotoDNA’s “hash” matching technology made it possible to identify known illegal images even if someone had altered them. Facebook, Twitter and Google all use the the same hash database to identify and remove illegal images.
- Freak_NL 9y agoI expect that the engineers developing this would go for a hash based on an abstraction of the image represented, not the actual bits of the image file.