Slashdot Mirror


Forensic Analysis Reveals Al-Qaeda's Image Doctoring

WerewolfOfVulcan writes "Wired reports that researcher Neal Krawetz revealed some very interesting things about the Al-Qaeda images broadcast in the mass media. Analysis shows that they're heavily manipulated, a discussion meant to illustrate a new technique that can spot forgery in digital media. 'Krawetz was ... able to determine that the writing on the banner behind al-Zawahiri's head was added to the image afterward. In the second picture above showing the results of the error level analysis, the light clusters on the image indicate areas of the image that were added or changed. The subtitles and logos in the upper right and lower left corners ... were all added at the same time, while the banner writing was added at a different time, likely around the same time that al-Zawahiri was added, Krawetz says.'"

22 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. so... by zulater · · Score: 5, Funny

    at least there is someone else as bad as me at Photoshop!

  2. This looks shopped... by ansomatica · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can tell from some of the pixels and having seen quite a few shops in my time.

    --
    -==-
  3. msm by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think it has been pretty well documented in the blogging community that many of the images that the main stream media picks up and propogates are heavily altered, faked, or come from completely different events than what they claim to depict. This is not just with al-quaeda, but governments and any group that has an agenda and is media savvy - foreign or domestic.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:msm by afidel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, Photoshop has made it impossible to trust anything you see. Video is still kind of difficult to alter like these photos were, but it's certainly possible for someone with the resources of a government of international organization behind them.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:msm by samkass · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even before Photoshop, inappropriate use of stock footage or using visual scenes of the wrong event was pretty common and made for more exciting news. I remember in the late 80's reports of a student riot in South Korea... my father was there at the time. There may have been a few disgruntled students there at the time, but his pictures are completely different (no violence or anything.) Turns out the news companies heard about a student protest and just looked for random footage of asian students rioting and put it on the air when talking about the situation.

      Of course, Final Cut Studio and Photoshop make it even easier, but the news has always been more about entertainment than information.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    3. Re:msm by Applekid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even over the last 10 years video alterations have been getting more and more sophisticated. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAFp4CaeDqU

      While the video is clearly tongue-in-cheek and advertising driven, it's slightly disturbing the novices who cut their teeth on this stuff and evolve their skills in the advertising world could go out and "find" video of just about anything they wanted to engineer in the media. Who would be able to stop them?

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    4. Re:msm by ccandreva · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they are showing video of them in a fancy office, that implies their movement is doing well.

      If in fact they are in a cave somewhere in front of a black sheet, then the message is a big fat lie.

    5. Re:msm by plover · · Score: 4, Interesting
      There are many reasons for doctoring photos. The point of these isn't to "confuse the enemy", but to "boost morale of the troops", by showing their leaders as so successful that they can sit out in the open, in a living room somewhere, and lead a normal life in the face of the insignificant U.S. forces. While in reality, they're cowering in bunkers or caves, or perhaps hiding in Pakistan or Iran.

      Unfortunately, detecting the fakes isn't enough. The CIA could say "Hey, look, these are faked, you're following cowards" but that'd be dismissed simply due to the source. What really needs to happen is these forgery-detection tools need to get in the hands of the "faithful" so they can convince themselves that they're being led by cowardly stooges. (Not that they would, as the leaders would probably dismiss such tools as lies from the Great Satan.)

      --
      John
    6. Re:msm by Jimithing+DMB · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is very common. My dad worked for a power company and one of the local news organizations did a story on pollution. So after my dad talked about their scrubbers and other emissions controls (which he was very instrumental in putting in) the reporter decided that it wasn't sensationalist enough so he pulled a dirty trick. One of their power plants was right next to a steel mill so instead of the reporter doing his monologue with the power plant in the background, he and his camera man simply turned around and put the steel mill right next door in the background then proceeded to open up with "I'm here at .. generating station."

      He didn't technically lie; after all he was on the property of the generating station. But the images didn't reflect the nearly nonexistant exhaust of the powerplant (a little NOx which shows up brown on certain days) but instead reflected the constant fires and smoke billowing out of the steel mill. No photoshop required.

  4. Done for their safety? by jsight · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There was a report several years ago that the US had used the rock outcroppings behind Osama in one of his videos to attempt to locate him. I wonder if some of these modifications are made to make locating them more difficult?

    1. Re:Done for their safety? by hoggoth · · Score: 5, Funny

      If Osama has any sense of humor at all, in his next videos he will be standing in front of The Whitehouse, standing side-by-side with the Statue of Liberty, as a talking head on Mt. Rushmore, on a fake-studio set of a moon landing, etc.
      Come on, you can't be all 'kill-the-infidels' ALL the time?!

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    2. Re:Done for their safety? by Kurrurrin · · Score: 5, Funny

      http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/forensics/

      Or maybe he did. Your google-fu is weak.

      --
      -Doug
  5. Logical Fallacy by bigattichouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The logical fallacy is "Al qaeda edited these videos" ... perhaps it should be stated as "Al qaeda videos have been edited" ... you have no idea WHO actually edited them.

    Not that I'm pointing fingers or anything. ahem (wag the dog)

    --
    meh
  6. A doctored picture is worth a thousand lies by davidwr · · Score: 4, Funny

    The tricky part is knowing if it's been doctored.

    OB /.ism: In Soviet Russia, propaganda pictures manipulate YOU!

    Oh wait, that was the whole point :(.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  7. Re:Software - Good thing. by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most forensic photography is digital these days and the resulting images run through verification software to prove that they are 'straight from the camera'.

    The SLRs I shoot are Canons and they provide the option of "Add Original Decision Data" in their settings. Combined with Canon's data verification kit any of the images I shoot can be demonstrated to be originals, with minimal in camera image processing.

    And anyone who thinks image alteration in the film world is too hard to undertake to swing a court case can't be taken seriously.

    --
    "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  8. Damn subtitles! by dark-br · · Score: 4, Funny

    So he doesn't have those subtitles in real life? Crap, that means the whole strategy to finding him will have to be changed once again!

  9. Re:Surprise! by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I believe a lot of people would like to question you on your belief that America has acted ethically in the Middle East within the last decade or so.

    America never went to war with communism, it never beat communism, it went to war with Russia, communism much like terror isn't a real thing made of matter, you cannot shoot an ideal, only people who use that ideal to represent themselves (be it true or false).

    I'm sorry to say but you seem to act like these people are pure unrefined evil and just want to destroy America. They aren't some inhuman savage monster, they are people with ideals (no matter how corrupt YOU or I may see them) and they are standing up to America in the only way they can. You can bet if someone invaded America in 50 years time and America no longer had the military power to fight "the right way" *ahem* then they would use the exact same tactics and skills. Not to mention it was America who taught these groups to fight in the first place. They used these people and then dropped them like a bad habit, they aren't raving madmen as you portray them, but nor are they heroic freedom fighters either, they are people living their lives how they see best. Judge them how you wish, but don't forget they are human beings just like we are.

    --
    I like muppets.
  10. Re:Stego by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, the NSA has done significant steganographic analysis of the videos.
    They found the hidden subtext: 'BUY MORE OVALTINE'

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  11. Re:Great by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just make one up with Photoshop.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  12. Re:Software - Good thing. by necro81 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You might also check out the research of Hany Farid, a CS researcher at Dartmouth who has come up with algorithms to detect if an image has been doctored.

  13. Won't work by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It won't work. If just having the means to prove something were actually enough to convince the faithful... well, how do you explain the southern USA?

    It's not just a jab at the fine bible-thumping guys and gals down there, though. It happens the same everywhere. Europe had its own counter-enlightenment movement, waaaay back. As in, a couple of centuries back. That's really what happens when you assault someone's beliefs hard enough: he'll just switch to block-head mode.

    If it's truly a believer you don't just have to push hard enough until his defenses crumble and he goes, "omg, I've been blind for so long, I've seen the light now." It's more like the Dune shields: the harder you push, the more resistance you get. And if you're doing an all out fast assault, expect to meet a (mental) immovable wall. And more than a good dose of hostility. It'll get nowhere.

    You have to go slowly and nicely if you want to get anywhere.

    (The same applies to culture, to some extent, btw. If you try to change a culture at gun point, expect a lot of resistance, and when it changes it will be in the direction you don't expect. It's a bit like trying to twist a gyroscope.)

    Plus, humans generally can act... well, like small children. If they like you, they'll believe every word you say, and if they dislike you, they'll try to spite you and contradict you.

    The rise of fundamentalist islamism can be traced mostly to the above two factors. The middle east has been shafted _hard_ by the western powers and partially by Israel. So a lot of people rallied around those waving a "fuck the West!" banner. Add to that a lot of (perceived) sneering and outright hostility to their religion, and they'll just rally harder to defend it.

    It's just human nature, and the west did the same in similar situations.

    And the lack of dialog sure doesn't help either. Each time someone there actually tries to say what _is_ their problem, the west goes "la la la, I'm not hearing anything" or "they're probably rambling about their false god or something." It's the perfect recipe to keep the hostility going.

    At any rate, IMHO just adding more force to that already disastrous recipe won't do any good. You may think that just giving them more proof that you're right and they're wrong is just what's needed to finally make their mental defenses crumble, but see what I've said before: it's IMHO already at the point where increasing the pressure just increases the resistance.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  14. Re:Surprise! by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry to say but you seem to act like these people are pure unrefined evil and just want to destroy America. They aren't some inhuman savage monster, they are people with ideals (no matter how corrupt YOU or I may see them) and they are standing up to America in the only way they can.

    That's an appropriately lefty, liberal way to look at it, but I take issue with this point.

    Look at the Taliban in Afghanistan. That wasn't about fighting back at America. That was about seizing power over an entire population. Yes, you could say that it was in the name of "ideals," but the truth is that people who seek power do it because they want the power, not the ideal.

    You see the same thing in Iraq right now, with the civil war. For a lot of the so-called insurgents, job #1 is not striking back at America. It's gaining control of Iraq. Will they go after the West after that? Probably. But to say that everything Arab extremists do in the Middle East is an understandable response to Western aggression is just silly.

    These are power games at work. The average citizens of Iraq are the ones caught in the middle. Yes, the U.S. has shamed itself in the region. But the Islamic agitators are no better.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!