Slashdot Mirror


Interpol Unscrambles Doctored Photo In Manhunt

jackpot777 writes in with an AP story out of Paris reporting that Interpol has distributed photos of a man suspected of sexually exploiting children. The images were recovered from pictures taken off the Internet in which the man's face had been blurred using something like Photoshop's Filter > Distort > Twirl tool. German police were able to recover recognizable images of the man, whose identity and nationality are not known. Interpol would not discuss the techniques used to recover the images. jackpot777 writes: "It does show one interesting facet of internet privacy that has also been noted with topics ranging from reading blurred check numbers in images to Google's plan to blur out license plate and face data for Street View. And that is: blurring is not the same as completely obscuring. As computers become more adept at extrapolating data of different types, your identity isn't safe unless you completely cover all those identifying features."

11 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Super-sekr1t unblurring techniques by acb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely Interpol's top-secret image-unblurring technology is just a matter of applying the Twirl effect in the opposite direction at the same location, and perhaps applying some image-enhancement plug-ins to the resulting area? I doubt it's anything one couldn't do with off-the-shelf software.

    1. Re:Super-sekr1t unblurring techniques by jamesshuang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not just use the simplest one - a black box? Information can't be extrapolated from something that doesn't exist. Also, I doubt you'd have problems with recognition - if anyone sees a body, neck, and a black box, I doubt they'll think you have decapitated people running around...

    2. Re:Super-sekr1t unblurring techniques by Mr+Z · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Another fun technique is to just paste something plausible there—like another face, or pieces of other faces—before blurring. I often do the same thing when blurring out numbers. You might be able to get away with a plasma fractal with appropriate skin tones.

      I figure it gives the hacks something to get excited about until they realize it really is gibberish. :-)

      --Joe
  2. Hardly Rocket Science by clickclickdrone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >Interpol would not discuss the techniques
    I showed this to my PS using friend and he shurgged, said 'Just do a radial blur in the opposite direction' and 30 seconds later had a picture about 80-90% as good as the one they're waving about as being the result of some super secret methodology.
    It does strike me as a bit stupid explaining it all - now crims will just use better techniques for blurring themselves out. The media, law enforcement agencies are doing this more and more and it's insane - "we just had an idea for a terrorist attack that might happen and here it is in full", "This is foresnic evidence that allowed us to catch the crim" and so on.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    1. Re:Hardly Rocket Science by suv4x4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I showed this to my PS using friend and he shurgged, said 'Just do a radial blur in the opposite direction' and 30 seconds later had a picture about 80-90% as good as the one they're waving about as being the result of some super secret methodology.
      It does strike me as a bit stupid explaining it all - now crims will just use better techniques for blurring themselves out. The media, law enforcement agencies are doing this more and more and it's insane - "we just had an idea for a terrorist attack that might happen and here it is in full", "This is foresnic evidence that allowed us to catch the crim" and so on.


      Yup, they spun it (pun intended) into cheap PR. The problem is, it's not that they are super smart, it's that the criminal was super stupid.

      And it'll make anyone with basic image processing skills question their overall expertise if they'd brag about untwirl.

      That said, the average folk will definitely be impressed. I knew a guy who inverted his photo in attempt to protect his identity (no, he didn't molest children). Imagine his shock when I took the inverted photo, inverted it again arriving at the original.

      To him I'm probably some sorta super genius who used sophisticated data restoration hack. To a guy with basic knowledge, it's nothing worth noting.

      To see how blur can restore detail not visible to the naked eye, check out Focus Magic. Not as easy as untwirl, but gives you an idea. This is because the blur distribution (usually gaussian if digital, or linear with cameras) gives away the possible origin position of the pixels.

      If you pixelize however, with big enough square, you lose real resolution and that's much harder to restore anything interesting out of (it's not like in movies, with the unlimited extrapolation techniques, as we all know).

      Other gotchas: covering with black rectangle but leaving it only 1-2% transparent. Looks solid, but data can be recovered.

      And a very common other method: people keep leaving their name and camera model in the meta info of the image. Easy to check out via right-click>Properties in Windows.

      PS: it was "twirl", not "radial blur" btw.

  3. Re:Blurring different from twirling... by KlaymenDK · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pixellation is only effective if done really, really coarsely ... so you might as well just opt for the classic black bar to begin with.

    The link about cheques in the summary tells more (if it's that old article I think it is).

  4. Re:Once the data's gone, it's gone... by cnettel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Also, for check numbers, as well as facial features, we expect a quite specific structure. This means that the set of possible original images is not uniform, so it's quite possible to detect a remarkable level of detail (like the specific check number, if the font is well-defined), even when a lot of information has been lost.

  5. Re:Blurring different from twirling... by baldass_newbie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Then again, removing information, by pixellating for example, would be best.

    Even better would be to not rape little kids in the first place.
    --
    The opposite of progress is congress
  6. Rellying on the CSI effect by DrYak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, for the average /.er this is absolutely trivial :
    the idiot used a filter that just moved the data around in predictable way (in circles), and the police did transpose the data in the opposite direction and got the picture back. The picture was not blurred at all (in the mathematical sense of lowering the resolution).

    Interpol bragged about it not because of some obscure technical feat. They bragged about as a PR stunt, in order to take advantage of the " CSI effect ".

    Joe 6 pack, has recently started to understand that incredibly big zooms, with some magical "picture enhancement effects" that keeps incredible amount of details - as done by Deckart in Blade Runner, or regularly featured on CSI - can't be actually achieved in real life. Because everyone is criticizing those shows for the lack of realism in their zooming achievement.

    But now Interpol pulls this PR stunt, where they show how they managed to recover the identity of the maniac. Now people every where are starting to think "Oh may god ! They actually have the technology ! They can "enhance" pictures and get the faces back !". The goal of Interpol was to instill fear in would-be criminal who would hope to stay anonymous with some photoshop tricks tricks. Maybe this wasn't the only stuff that was openly criticized in CSI but that was secretly doable by the real police. Now cue-in some armchair conspiracy theorists, who could pretend that the whole criticizing of "unrealistic police TV-shows" was a government conspiracy to cover up technology that actually exist (additional points earned if technology is of alien origin), or they could say that government has put a backdoor inside Photoshop that does keep the blurred faces saved in steganography (bonus point for using buzzword).

    They are creating a climate of FUD, in the hope to deter would-be criminals.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  7. Re:Crucial overlooked ideas by djh101010 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They could then look at the twirled test image and come up with a mapping of twirled pixels to untwirled pixels. This information could be used to "untwirl" the original image by grabbing the pixels at the twirled coordinates and moving them back to where the mapping says they probably originated.

    It probably helps a LOT that in several of the images, there's a strong line visible in the background. Measure the twirl of that, you've got your benchmark right there. Center of the twirl is probably easy enough to locate too. So there's your twist, and where to apply it.

    It's a good thing so many criminals are dumb. It's the smart ones that you have to worry more about.
  8. Re:Blurring different from twirling... by apparently · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Who are the alleged victims?

    "Alleged" implies that a picture of an adult molesting a child, constitutes only an "alleged" crime.
    "There were no rape report from anyone" implies that a picture of the act being conducted isn't enough. That the 4 year old Cambodian sex slave needs to file a proper report.

    In a discussion regarding the photographically documented molestation of small children, you want to expand the discussion to include statutory rape allegations between teenagers. How about we also talk about taxidermy and monster trucks? Because if you think there's any similarity between the teenage sex issue and child molestation, then any "discussion" with you might as well go down those tangents as well.