Re: [privacy] Digital Camera Fingerprints

["Marius Gheorghescu" <mariusg () microsoft com>]

You are right. However, the header will stay in the image much longer
(it does not disappear simply because the image is edited). For example,
in Photoshop when you do 'save for web' it removes the EXIF header (and
a couple other similar headers) but if you do 'save as' or 'save' it
doesn't touch it. Btw, the reason PS removes the EXIF header is to save
bandwidth ;)

Just for fun: search your 'Temporary Internet Files' folder for *.JPG
files containing the word EXIF ;-))). Not all of them contain complete
EXIF information, but some do. If you view the file under a hex editor,
the information will be visible at the beginning of the file.
Alternatively you can view file properties from Explorer (Properties,
Summary, Advanced view)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard M. Smith [mailto:rms () bsf-llc com]
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:28 AM
> To: privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
> Subject: Re: [privacy] Digital Camera Fingerprints
>
> My understanding is that most digital cameras include a unique serial
> number
> in the EXIF headers of a JPEG file.  This header will stay around
until a
> photo file is editted.  EXIF headers also include the make and model
> number
> of a camera.
>
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Polazzo [mailto:jpolazzo () thesportsauthority com]
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:54 AM
> To: privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
> Subject: [privacy] Digital Camera Fingerprints
>
>  http://www.boingboing.net/2006/04/22/digital_cameras_have.html
>
> Digital cameras have unique "noise" fingerprints?
> A researcher at SUNY Binghamton reports that he can tell which camera
> took any given photo by matching the photo's unique "weak noise-like
> pattern of pixel-to-pixel non-uniformity."
>
>     Like actual fingerprints, the digital "noise" in original images
is
> stochastic in nature - that is, it contains random variables - which
are
> inevitably created during the manufacturing process of the camera and
> its sensors. This virtually ensures that the noise imposed on the
> digital images from any particular camera will be consistent from one
> image to the next, even while it is distinctly different.
>
>     In preliminary tests, Fridrich's lab analyzed 2,700 pictures taken
> by nine digital cameras and with 100 percent accuracy linked
individual
> images with the camera that took them.
>
>
> --------------------------------
>
> I can think of good and bad uses for this technology (as with all),
but
> the idea of being able to tell who is _taking_ the child pr0n pictures
> is pretty enticing.
>
> -JP
> _______________________________________________
> privacy mailing list
> privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
> http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy
>
> _______________________________________________
> privacy mailing list
> privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
> http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy