7 ms·
Require that videos submitted as evidence use keypairs which were provably registered or published prior to the event. Don't have a registered key? Great, but
by andrewstuart2 9y ago
Require that videos submitted as evidence use keypairs which were provably registered or published prior to the event.
Don't have a registered key? Great, but that's no longer admissible.
Still, problems would exist with letting the camera read the private key for signing, but not allowing an attacker (forger) to access the private key and thus sign their modified footage.
Just a thought.
- PeterisP 9y agoCourts will use the best evidence available for a particular case, including all kinds of things that obviously can be less than perfectly reliable. Physical photographs have been doctored (or staged) for more than a century, and that doesn't mean that photos as such are inadmissible as evidence; so the fact that the process for taking video wasn't especially tamper-proof won't by itself be sufficient to disqualify it. If a video is available and doesn't contain a pre-published key then the courts will still want to use it as useful evidence instead of simply ignoring it - sure, the opponent might have a slightly easier time attempting to contest that evidence as possibly doctored (just as they can do now), but courts will still make a judgement for each individual case.
- smallnamespace 9y agoAtoms are harder to move around then bits, and the rapid development in our ability to generate convincing video means that it will be hard to predict what sort of evidence we can generate now that will be convincing in the future.