• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    That only works if everyone plays by the rules. Literally everyone.

    Here’s the image, signed. Here’s an unauthorized copy of the image or copy of a portion of the image, with the pixels extracted and saved as a .jpeg with none of the identifying signature or certificate data. Here’s that same image posted to 4chan and reddit.

    A certificate chain would only work if every image displaying piece of software in the world not only played by its rules, but were also incapable of displaying or modifying an unsigned image. I don’t think I have to spell out for you what kind of nightmare that would be.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Basically, screenshots bypass any security built into the Metadata?

      Double checking as I assume that is the case but don’t know for certain.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, if it’s truly metadata that’s not in the image itself. For instance, it could theoretically be digitally watermarked (this technology already exists, actually) in a manner that humans can’t see or is tough to notice, but an algorithm looking for it can spot. That can be defeated, too, although depending on the robustness of the watermark technology it may take more effort.

        The output loophole always exists: Any time you produce any output capable of being understood by a human (eyes, ears, both…) somebody can record and reproduce it. Probably not bit-for-bit, pixel-for-pixel, but you can always point a camera at the screen. (Or put your screen face down on a flatbed scanner that’s had its lightbar defeated, or put a microphone in front of the speakers, or…)