Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Forensics v. Photoshop

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Forensics v. Photoshop

 
 
Me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-18-2012
On 19/09/2012 10:52 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.09.18 18:38 , Me wrote:
>> On 19/09/2012 9:31 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
>>> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...e-marketplace/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> or http://tinyurl.com/8g8udyp
>>>
>>> and http://vimeo.com/49199110 (arguments aren't that convincing)
>>>
>>> (It's only $890. Probably more in NZ... )
>>>

>> Hmmm - so it can't prove that the image content /has/ been tampered
>> with, and neither can it prove that the image file /hasn't/ been
>> tampered with. What does it claim to do again?

>
> Raise doubts. It's claim is to look at how images are made (signature)
> by the camera. If there is a doubt it will be raised. A change to an
> image in PS would not pass that.
>

You don't need to manipulate an image to deliberately not show the "truth".
We need (untampered) video, then you're safe to believe what your eyes
show you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v2xnl6LwJE

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Peter Jason
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-19-2012
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 11:24:29 +1200, Me
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 19/09/2012 10:52 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.09.18 18:38 , Me wrote:
>>> On 19/09/2012 9:31 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/0...e-marketplace/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> or http://tinyurl.com/8g8udyp
>>>>
>>>> and http://vimeo.com/49199110 (arguments aren't that convincing)
>>>>
>>>> (It's only $890. Probably more in NZ... )
>>>>
>>> Hmmm - so it can't prove that the image content /has/ been tampered
>>> with, and neither can it prove that the image file /hasn't/ been
>>> tampered with. What does it claim to do again?

>>
>> Raise doubts. It's claim is to look at how images are made (signature)
>> by the camera. If there is a doubt it will be raised. A change to an
>> image in PS would not pass that.
>>

>You don't need to manipulate an image to deliberately not show the "truth".
>We need (untampered) video, then you're safe to believe what your eyes
>show you:
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v2xnl6LwJE



Surely the truth is that someone has invented an
anti-gravity screen!


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Forensics v. Photoshop Martin Brown Digital Photography 9 09-25-2012 01:32 PM
Re: Forensics v. Photoshop Martin Brown Digital Photography 2 09-19-2012 12:53 AM
Article: Windows Forensics: Have I been Hacked? BleepingComputer.com Computer Support 7 02-22-2004 04:58 PM
REVIEW: "Computer and Intrusion Forensics", George Mohay et al Rob Slade, doting grandpa of Ryan and Trevor Computer Security 0 07-15-2003 02:49 PM



Advertisments