Slashdot Mirror
New Photo Fraud Detection Software
An anonymous reader writes "CNet is reporting that Hany Farid, Professor of Computer Science and applied mathematics at Darthmouth College, has developed a new version of his Image Science Group's photo fraud software now in use by the FBI and large media organizations. The current software is written in Matlab, but the new version will be written in Java making it much more readily available to local police and smaller media organizations. From the article: 'I hope to have a beta out in the next six months,' Farid said. 'Right now, you need someone who is reasonably well-trained to use it.'"
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Can we adapt it to detect Slashdot article fraud?
followed by -
"...the software will be made freely available under an open-source license.
--
"Taxpayers," he said, "are paying me to do this research and it needs to go back out." "
Which is it?
As pointed out earlier, apparently the source code won't be released but it is open-source. Interesting.
Anyways, also FTFA:
So do they get accepted or rejected?
Note that the submitter identifies the product as "photo fraud software" not "photo fraud detection software." This is quite apt, since the application will obviously cut both ways. Someone cooking a photo could simply run each version through this software, making minor tweaks until their "improvements" pass its inspection. If the software works the way it appears to, it would be the image manipulator's equivalent of a spell checker.
In Soviet Union you airbrush scientist out of photo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_disappearance# Soviet_Union
The fun a government can now have with this package will be great.
False positives to kill a story?
Could real digital "abusing prisoners" images now be spun as a hoax?
Just a few well placed reports as to the authenticity of any new digital images could kill a story?
Or lure a leaker out to 'prove' the reality of the images only to face character assassination?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
From the article:
"Right now, you need someone who is reasonably well-trained to use it."
I would like to hope that if this software is going to be used for anything of consequence, that someone reasonably well-trained will always be using it. A system is only as good as its operator, ultimately.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
As other commenters have already pointed out, the confusion over its open-source nature(is it or is it not?) is critical. Without the source code/algorithm being open-source and freely accessible to the public how can one trust its "judgement"? In a legal situation, an accused will always question the accuracy of the algorithm and the software.
;-)
On a different angle, I wonder how soon before such detection capabilities will be available to consumers either as an installable plugin or web-based feature. Imagine being able to verify the authenticity of any picture on the web, ranging from that nude shot of your ex- to that impossibly perfect low-light picture taken by your photography class buddy
It determined that Pamela Anderson's boobs are FAKE!!
=D
Disclosure: I'm stupid
Rewrite software written in powerful mathematical simulation software in java?
What could possibly go wrong?
And now, rather than processing an image in 30 minutes, it takes 30 hours, yay!
In related news NASA announced today that it would close its public picture archives ;)
"I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google"
So - when can I expect to see this as a Firefox Extension?
"Warning: This nude of Britinet Spears has been photoshopped"
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
Just a matter of time before this application gets it's brother: "the simulator".
:D
It uses the same algorithms in a slightly different way: instead of checking for the signs of forgery it finds the tell-tale signs of modification and then reverse-modifies them to "what-should-be-there" to make an "original" modified image.
The result will be an image that is ofcourse different only from mathematical standpoint - visual information will be the same. If that wouldn't be true I would love to have an application that "unblurs" or "unblackouts" the censored parts of some pictures.
Image will have after processing the properties of an "original" because the signs of "not-original" will be detected and "fixed". Way to go...
What you're saying is a rehash of the argument that "Information security isn't secure when the algorithm's security depends on its secrecy".
Thing is, does the same thing hold true when you're talking about detecting fakes (say), as opposed to building strong encryption? If I announce "Well, we can tell this photo isn't genuine because this part which shouldn't be in focus is", I've effectively announced to any potential fraudsters who might be listening "OK, folks, you need to learn to get your focusing correct".
Realistically, the only way such an algorithm remains secure is if it cannot be beaten even with a full understanding of how it works - and I would ask if such an algorithm even exists yet. If the algorithm is anything less than 100% effective, chances are it doesn't.
"The lighting is off by 40 degrees," Farid said. "We are insensitive to it, but computers detect it."
Well even if that one is fake, at least we know that the one of John Kerry french-kissing Joseph Stalin is real.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
Once you have the comp in done in your image editor with as little pixel and grain distortions as possible. Try the following. Note this does require a $5000 set of plugins http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/ Furnace (no not the After deffects set) and the $5000 program them run in. http://www.eyeonline.com/ or http://www.apple.com/shake http://www.d2software.com/ (and yes a few others in the $100k+ range) In fact I might even do the whole comp in my film compositor with the use of some other tools. Anyway. Comp elements use historgram matching to match elements in the shot that should have the same color ranges. (You could do a color overlay in PS.) Ok now you have a good comp with good edges or edge blending and light wraps. You completely degrain the shot with furnace (each element seperatly degrained) You then regrain the shot as a whole. degraining and regraining work on all three color plates seperatly so when you regrain the shot it should be adding basically another blending of the of the colors making them uniform to what the original piece of film would have been. Now you take that file and do a film out of that. That is a very simlified break down of the technique. Many of the steps for each step are left out. My basic assumption is that the software looks for irregularities in the pixels deformations, areas of transition, and color offsets in the comp. I would love to go up against this software. (not that I would win but it would be fun to try as long as someone else is paying for the film outs and scans :-).) OH and if your source and destination or supposed to be film you probably want a drum scan not a CCD scan.
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
Big_Foot_Prints.