3 ms·
I'm the developer behind Redact.Photo [0], instead of blurring or pixelating the image, I've added an additional step to improve data security. See "how it work
by rikschennink 5y ago
I'm the developer behind Redact.Photo [0], instead of blurring or pixelating the image, I've added an additional step to improve data security. See "how it works" section on the page.
1. Image is scaled down to create a mosaic effect
2. Pixels are moved around a random offset of x and y axis
3. Blurring is applied
Adding black bars over information will always be better but this does result in more smooth redaction that I think cannot be undone because of the randomisation step.
[0] https://redact.photo https://redact.photo
- bagels 5y agoI tried it out. It still leaves a lot of the original information in the redact. Is it enough to reverse? I can't say it definitely is, but I would not be willing to risk something important with it.
- rikschennink 5y agoI'm not sure what you tested with, but it might "seem" that the original information is there? Only the original color data remains, but the detail is gone and each pixel position behind the redacted area is randomised/mixed. This randomisation step also overwrites pixel information so there is data loss as well. Because it's then blurred it looks like the info is blurred only. But if you'd be able to reverse the blur you'd end up with pixel noise. I find it hard to believe that that noise could be reverted.
- bobsmooth 5y agoQuick and it appears secure! I would add a blur around the edge of the boxes so there isn't a sharp seam.
- rikschennink 5y agoThanks for trying it out! Excellent idea, will see if i can implement that :)