4 ms·

Yeah that DHS screenshot is fake. If you boost the exposure there's conspicuous gaps in the JPEG artifacts around the fields where they were edited. They would

by jsheard 11mo ago

Yeah that DHS screenshot is fake. If you boost the exposure there's conspicuous gaps in the JPEG artifacts around the fields where they were edited. They would have got away with it if they just used Inspect Element!

HaZeust 11mo ago
Are you sure? https://x.com/DHSgov/status/1992314672436175055 https://x.com/DHSgov/status/1992314672436175055 --- Head of Product at X also changed narratives in real-time, going from "this was never shown" for gray accounts like the DHS', to saying the feature was disabled due to incorrect information from IP ranges changing over time - when you're literally just checking their first IP check-in: https://x.com/lporiginalg/status/1992385445024665655 https://x.com/lporiginalg/status/1992385445024665655 --- And there was, to everyone's credit, DOZENS of X threads of people torture-testing their browser recordings to confirm whether the information was legit or not: https://x.com/AdameMedia/status/1992331293212963080 https://x.com/AdameMedia/status/1992331293212963080 --- Make your own decisions, but that's what I took from the situation.
- jsheard 11mo ago
  > Are you sure? I'm sure that the screenshot going around shows signs of being edited, I checked that myself. For the rest, I have no idea. https://postimg.cc/gngQL6BY https://postimg.cc/gngQL6BY
  - HaZeust 11mo ago
    Maybe THAT screenshot was, but it's not looking good that the information in that screenshot (doctored or not) wasn't exposed. Also fotoforensics is irrelevant, take a screenshot of an X account's information and you see those black bars. Why would they doctor the "@DHSgov" username otherwise lol?