3 ms·
"Provided a text document with specific fonts" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Pretty much by definition, text documents don't supply fonts. So, reading
by mdb31 4y ago
"Provided a text document with specific fonts" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
Pretty much by definition, text documents don't supply fonts. So, reading text documents is still fine, unless your OS "helpfully" opens text documents using rich text viewers, in which case: please talk to your OS vendor.
For rich text documents, say PDF, the risk of personalized-and-or-remote embedded fonts is not exactly new. Maybe this variant is, but the general idea definitely isn't.
So, this, to me, is at best a possibly-novel "how to do DRM with PDF" technique. Which is interesting, but not exactly earth-shattering.
Or am I missing something here?
- dwringer 4y agoWell, if you print it out then it's all kind of embedded on a piece of paper.
- epilys 4y ago> "how to do DRM with PDF" technique Not DRM, but fingerprinting? Sure. This gives me the idea to write a PDF sanitizer that resets glyph rotation and kerning to prevent this.
- orhmeh09 4y agoWhat’s your definition? Here’s theirs: > Our FontCode system embeds in a text document any type of in- formation as a bit string. For example, an arbitrary text message can be coded into a bit string using the standard ASCII code or Unicode. We refer to such a bit string as a plain message. In a text document, the basic elements of embedding a plain message are the letters appearing in a particular font I think you’re talking about the plain message. There’s nothing wrong with their definition of text document.
- avisser 4y ago> There’s nothing wrong with their definition of text document. I think we can agree that it could be more specific. Me and OP read "text document" and hear "plain-text file". The article talks about using Word. If someone sent me a Word document and called it a "text document" I'd look at them cross.