4 ms·

Detecting Currency in Photoshop

48 points by hootx 16y ago

DrStalker 16y ago
When this feature was first added to photoshop it caused a noticable delay when opening files or pasting content from outside photoshop. It was possible to disable the check by removing a DLL from photoshop and get the speed back to normal. Somehow I don't think this feature has done much to discourage serious counterfitters, it's just annoyed legitimate users, especially as there are pefectly legal ways in which an image of a banknote can be used.
- pyre 16y ago
  I don't think that it's meant to discourage serious counterfeiters. It's meant as a barrier to casual counterfeiters. Now that tools are powerful as Photoshop are at the fingertips of the masses, this seems like it is meant as a way to prevent people that otherwise wouldn't know the first thing about counterfeiting from just firing up Photoshop and trying to make fake money. (I'm not commenting on it's efficacy though)
- Vivtek 16y ago
  This magical currency detection is in a single DLL? Why hasn't it already been reverse engineered?
- cosmicray 16y ago
  > When this feature was first added to photoshop Do you know what release that was ? Perhaps this cranky old copy of PS-5 I use is free of that enhancement.
  - sciolistse 16y ago
    It was added in the first "CS" version.. Photoshop 5 is, unencumbered.
slavak 16y ago
Is this really a prevalent feature these days? I must be completely out of the loop. That must be the most useless "feature" I've ever heard of. What possible reason is there for doing this?!
- aw3c2 16y ago
  I would guess some politicians asked for way to stop people counterfeiting money with image manipulation tools or scanners. This solution satisfied them and made them feel good.
- Zak 16y ago
  I understand why this might make an uneducated politician happy. What I don't understand is the incentive for Adobe to do it. Was there ever a danger of restrictions on image editing software?
  - A1kmm 16y ago
    Just a guess: maybe they have a contract to supply software to one or more governments, and either a term is that they have to do it, or they don't want to upset the government and lose the contract.
- tzs 16y ago
  > What possible reason is there for doing this?! You might try reading the first sentence of the article.
  - A1kmm 16y ago
    Has it been edited? In the version at the time of writing this comment, it says that they 'will not process the images', but it doesn't say why not.
- TeMPOraL 16y ago
  Maybe it works as a cost-effective way to eliminate occasional counterfitter-wannabes. Reminds me of: http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/
jwr 16y ago
When you buy Photoshop, does it say on the box or in the specs that it will choose which images it will allow you to process and refuse ones it deems unsuitable? Just wondering.
- dsl 16y ago
  No. But you can return it to Adobe for a full refund. The Secret Service will even hand deliver the check.
athom 16y ago
Coming soon to the GIMP. And Krita. And... ?
- athom 16y ago
  Wow, somebody was not amused. No clue why...
  - A1kmm 16y ago
    Both are GPLd programs, most likely with copyright ownership spread across large numbers of contributors in many countries. The GPL says you can't distribute the program unless you include the complete source code. To legally distribute a version of a GPLd image manipulation program with a closed-source currency detection module in it, you would need to get every person who holds copyright in that program to agree - probably an impossible task given many probably feel strongly against this kind of restriction. Alternatively, it might be possible to get a law passed to exempt distributors from that terms of the license - but that would only apply in one country, and it would also need to override the 'freedom or death' term of the GPL. Even if there was a Free / Open Source currency detection engine, I doubt it would be included in the projects unless it became a legal requirement.
    - athom 16y ago
      Which was actually my point. I don't see anyone willingly adding a feature to actually restrict functionality the way a currency detection engine would/does. At least, in an open source project, I think there would be enough resistance from contributors to keep such components from becoming standard features. This I consider a good thing about the GIMP, Krita, and any/every other FOSS graphics package out there. That said, it does present a pretty little puzzle for the FOSS community. Given governments' recent roles in expanding the reach of FOSS software, I don't think we can ignore the question of what happens when and where the interests of the state conflict with those of the FOSS community. Here, specifically, we have a case where a government may desire a "feature" anathema to the community, but likely can't force the community to accept such a requirement. What they might be able to do is outlaw any version of the package which does not incorporate the restriction. How effectively can could they enforce it? Not much, perhaps, right now, but we'd be fooling ourselves to think they never could. It's all but certain they're going to keep trying, even if it proves utterly impossible. Thank you for responding, A1kmm. This is what I was really hoping to see: some actual discussion of the point. In any case, I apologize for offending whoever downmodded me. I'll try not to be quite so snarky in future.
benjoffe 16y ago
The best solution is to just make the currency very difficult to counterfeit, eg. see Australian money which is plastic, textured and has a transparent section; alas, this software still detects Australian notes.
moe 16y ago
...because how could counterfeiters possibly do their job when deprived of the ability to add lens-flare
tzs 16y ago
I wonder how currency designers deal with this? In the US, at least, they use Photoshop for this.
jodrellblank 16y ago
As we add increasing amounts of software and microchips into the world around us, are we setting ourselves up for a future in which 1-in-a-million false positives / negatives end up happening in various systems several times a day? Sorry, this microwave cannot heat this product, the explosive-density-detector has triggered the security block (Now that I think about it, this mirrors my real world computing experience right now - endlessly pestered by false matches and ineffective checks. File downloads blocked by mime type, by browser, by file extension, file opening blocked by extension, program install blocked by UAC, program running blocked by inaccessible internet, file copy blocked by "unspecified security flaw"...)

48 points by hootx 16y ago

When this feature was first added to photoshop it caused a noticable delay when opening files or pasting content from outside photoshop. It was possible to disable the check by removing a DLL from photoshop and get the speed back to normal. Somehow I don't think this feature has done much to discourage serious counterfitters, it's just annoyed legitimate users, especially as there are pefectly legal ways in which an image of a banknote can be used.

pyre 16y ago
I don't think that it's meant to discourage serious counterfeiters. It's meant as a barrier to casual counterfeiters. Now that tools are powerful as Photoshop are at the fingertips of the masses, this seems like it is meant as a way to prevent people that otherwise wouldn't know the first thing about counterfeiting from just firing up Photoshop and trying to make fake money. (I'm not commenting on it's efficacy though)
Vivtek 16y ago
This magical currency detection is in a single DLL? Why hasn't it already been reverse engineered?
cosmicray 16y ago
> When this feature was first added to photoshop Do you know what release that was ? Perhaps this cranky old copy of PS-5 I use is free of that enhancement.
- sciolistse 16y ago
  It was added in the first "CS" version.. Photoshop 5 is, unencumbered.

slavak 16y ago

Is this really a prevalent feature these days? I must be completely out of the loop. That must be the most useless "feature" I've ever heard of. What possible reason is there for doing this?!

aw3c2 16y ago
I would guess some politicians asked for way to stop people counterfeiting money with image manipulation tools or scanners. This solution satisfied them and made them feel good.
Zak 16y ago
I understand why this might make an uneducated politician happy. What I don't understand is the incentive for Adobe to do it. Was there ever a danger of restrictions on image editing software?
- A1kmm 16y ago
  Just a guess: maybe they have a contract to supply software to one or more governments, and either a term is that they have to do it, or they don't want to upset the government and lose the contract.
tzs 16y ago
> What possible reason is there for doing this?! You might try reading the first sentence of the article.
- A1kmm 16y ago
  Has it been edited? In the version at the time of writing this comment, it says that they 'will not process the images', but it doesn't say why not.
TeMPOraL 16y ago
Maybe it works as a cost-effective way to eliminate occasional counterfitter-wannabes. Reminds me of: http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/f1/beware_trivial_inconveniences/

jwr 16y ago

When you buy Photoshop, does it say on the box or in the specs that it will choose which images it will allow you to process and refuse ones it deems unsuitable? Just wondering.

dsl 16y ago
No. But you can return it to Adobe for a full refund. The Secret Service will even hand deliver the check.

athom 16y ago

Coming soon to the GIMP. And Krita. And... ?

athom 16y ago
Wow, somebody was not amused. No clue why...
- A1kmm 16y ago
  Both are GPLd programs, most likely with copyright ownership spread across large numbers of contributors in many countries. The GPL says you can't distribute the program unless you include the complete source code. To legally distribute a version of a GPLd image manipulation program with a closed-source currency detection module in it, you would need to get every person who holds copyright in that program to agree - probably an impossible task given many probably feel strongly against this kind of restriction. Alternatively, it might be possible to get a law passed to exempt distributors from that terms of the license - but that would only apply in one country, and it would also need to override the 'freedom or death' term of the GPL. Even if there was a Free / Open Source currency detection engine, I doubt it would be included in the projects unless it became a legal requirement.
  - athom 16y ago
    Which was actually my point. I don't see anyone willingly adding a feature to actually restrict functionality the way a currency detection engine would/does. At least, in an open source project, I think there would be enough resistance from contributors to keep such components from becoming standard features. This I consider a good thing about the GIMP, Krita, and any/every other FOSS graphics package out there. That said, it does present a pretty little puzzle for the FOSS community. Given governments' recent roles in expanding the reach of FOSS software, I don't think we can ignore the question of what happens when and where the interests of the state conflict with those of the FOSS community. Here, specifically, we have a case where a government may desire a "feature" anathema to the community, but likely can't force the community to accept such a requirement. What they might be able to do is outlaw any version of the package which does not incorporate the restriction. How effectively can could they enforce it? Not much, perhaps, right now, but we'd be fooling ourselves to think they never could. It's all but certain they're going to keep trying, even if it proves utterly impossible. Thank you for responding, A1kmm. This is what I was really hoping to see: some actual discussion of the point. In any case, I apologize for offending whoever downmodded me. I'll try not to be quite so snarky in future.

benjoffe 16y ago

The best solution is to just make the currency very difficult to counterfeit, eg. see Australian money which is plastic, textured and has a transparent section; alas, this software still detects Australian notes.

moe 16y ago

...because how could counterfeiters possibly do their job when deprived of the ability to add lens-flare

tzs 16y ago

I wonder how currency designers deal with this? In the US, at least, they use Photoshop for this.

jodrellblank 16y ago

As we add increasing amounts of software and microchips into the world around us, are we setting ourselves up for a future in which 1-in-a-million false positives / negatives end up happening in various systems several times a day? Sorry, this microwave cannot heat this product, the explosive-density-detector has triggered the security block (Now that I think about it, this mirrors my real world computing experience right now - endlessly pestered by false matches and ineffective checks. File downloads blocked by mime type, by browser, by file extension, file opening blocked by extension, program install blocked by UAC, program running blocked by inaccessible internet, file copy blocked by "unspecified security flaw"...)