4 ms·
You don't have to go all the way back to the early 2000s to find poorly redacted federal documents. Rachel Maddow had a great segment on botched redactions, lik
by MichaelApproved 12y ago
You don't have to go all the way back to the early 2000s to find poorly redacted federal documents. Rachel Maddow had a great segment on botched redactions, like removing the black lines from a PDF.
The best solution was to actually cut out the parts of the page you don't want seen and then scan in the result. All other methods are prone to mistakes.
Edit: corrected link to segment http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/redaction-rules-how-best-to-keep-the-secrets-258076739607 http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/redaction-rule...
- Houshalter 12y agoWould a screenshot work?
- freehunter 12y agoI've always drawn over sensitive parts in Paint or something, then taken a screenshot of it. It makes sure that everything is compressed to a single layer and can't be undone.
- im3w1l 12y agoJust be sure to get all of it. It's pretty common that people leave a few pixels. How not to do it: https://imgur.com/ZaCIY5P https://imgur.com/ZaCIY5P
- dheera 12y agoLeave generous margins. JPEGs can have compression artifacts that leak information outside the boundaries of the object.
- Houshalter 12y agoIt shouldn't matter if the original image (the screenshot) didn't contain any information to leak.
- tormeh 12y agoExactly my thought. A BMP is too simple to go wrong. There's so many pitfalls with digital files, because they can have much more information than the viewer will show you in an obvious manner or at all. Not only layers, but metadata (EXIF) and whatnot.
- dheera 12y agoAlong the same lines, I remember an MIT Mystery Hunt puzzle once where there were hidden clues in a PostScript document. If you didn't think to look at the PostScript source you probably had no hope of solving it.