Re: [privacy] Digital Camera Fingerprints

[Scott Manley <djsnm () djsnm com>]

Amusingly enough, many images contain thumbnails in the EXIF header and 
on occasion these have revealed details that the publisher never 
intended - perhaps most famously when a TV presenter for TechTV 
published images which had revealing thumbnails

http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/features/45070/Cat_Schwartzs_Photoshop_Fix.html

http://www.hutta.com/thumbs/

Marius Gheorghescu wrote:
> 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

_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy