3 ms·

They say their model works for a hypothetical privacy preserving camera that masks 90% of the pixels. I’m not sure there’s much more to it; I think you’re read

• wizzwizz4 3y ago
  But a camera that masks 90% of the pixels isn't privacy-preserving. It's just a 90s consumer-grade webcam. They haven't shown that the approach works with actual privacy measures, which makes their claims in this area dubious.
  • marcellus23 3y ago
    > It's just a 90s consumer-grade webcam. The positions of the masked pixels are not stored in the resulting data -- it's not like they are just making some pixels black. The channel information is actually removed from the buffer entirely, and then inference is performed on that buffer: > The camera stores the remaining unmasked pixel channels in an array without retaining the coordinates of pixel channels on the image sensor. In this scenario, an ad- versary could not obtain a faithful reconstruction of the in- put image. Even if the adversary could guess pixel channel locations, the low resolution of captured data prevents the adversary from recovering a high-fidelity image Also: > Their "partially-masked image" just looks like a noisy image, not a redacted one The caption for the figure (assuming you're talking about figure 4) makes it clear that the figure is illustrative, since it includes the positions of the masked pixels. The pixel positions would not be present in the actual data that comes from this hypothetical camera. So what the figure "looks like" is irrelevant -- its purely illustrative.