info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
A novel use for EXIF (etc).
28 views
Skip to first unread message
geoff
Jan 16, 2023, 6:35:27 PM1/16/23
to
Alan Browne
Jan 17, 2023, 10:06:32 AM1/17/23
to
On 2023-01-16 18:35, geoff wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
Nothing to do with exif.
Steganography uses the image data itself by modifying image bits a very
slight amount up or down to represent the data of the hidden message.
To the viewer of the image there is no apparent information - it is in
"in the noise" so to speak.
With the right s/w and "password" (or key) decoding the data is trivial.
Detecting images with steganography in them is hard as well as it's
literally in the noise. So statistical techniques might find evidence
of it - but still not be able to decode and prove it absent the key and
particular encode algorithm used.
EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
this is pushing it a bit.
--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
Nothing to do with exif.
Steganography uses the image data itself by modifying image bits a very
slight amount up or down to represent the data of the hidden message.
To the viewer of the image there is no apparent information - it is in
"in the noise" so to speak.
With the right s/w and "password" (or key) decoding the data is trivial.
Detecting images with steganography in them is hard as well as it's
literally in the noise. So statistical techniques might find evidence
of it - but still not be able to decode and prove it absent the key and
particular encode algorithm used.
EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
this is pushing it a bit.
--
“Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present
danger to American democracy.”
- J Michael Luttig - 2022-06-16
- Former US appellate court judge (R) testifying to the January 6
committee
David Brooks
Jan 17, 2023, 11:24:55 AM1/17/23
to
On 17/01/2023 15:06, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2023-01-16 18:35, geoff wrote:
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>
> Nothing to do with exif.
>
> Steganography uses the image data itself by modifying image bits a very
> slight amount up or down to represent the data of the hidden message. To
> the viewer of the image there is no apparent information - it is in "in
> the noise" so to speak.
>
> With the right s/w and "password" (or key) decoding the data is trivial.
>
> Detecting images with steganography in them is hard as well as it's
> literally in the noise. So statistical techniques might find evidence
> of it - but still not be able to decode and prove it absent the key and
> particular encode algorithm used.
>
> EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
> detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
> specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
> this is pushing it a bit.
All very interesting though! 🙂
> On 2023-01-16 18:35, geoff wrote:
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>
> Nothing to do with exif.
>
> Steganography uses the image data itself by modifying image bits a very
> slight amount up or down to represent the data of the hidden message. To
> the viewer of the image there is no apparent information - it is in "in
> the noise" so to speak.
>
> With the right s/w and "password" (or key) decoding the data is trivial.
>
> Detecting images with steganography in them is hard as well as it's
> literally in the noise. So statistical techniques might find evidence
> of it - but still not be able to decode and prove it absent the key and
> particular encode algorithm used.
>
> EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
> detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
> specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
> this is pushing it a bit.
Can you help with this question, Alan?
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/254563418
--
Kind regards,
David
nospam
Jan 17, 2023, 11:45:50 AM1/17/23
to
In article <lZzxL.20724$eRZ7...@fx06.iad>, David Brooks
thread hijacking attempt.
<Davi...@a.loss.now> wrote:
> > EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
> > detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
> > specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
> > this is pushing it a bit.
>
> All very interesting though! ?
> > EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
> > detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
> > specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
> > this is pushing it a bit.
>
thread hijacking attempt.
Alan Browne
Jan 17, 2023, 11:58:05 AM1/17/23
to
David Brooks
Jan 17, 2023, 2:31:28 PM1/17/23
to
On 17/01/2023 16:57, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2023-01-17 11:45, nospam wrote:
>> In article <lZzxL.20724$eRZ7...@fx06.iad>, David Brooks
>> <Davi...@a.loss.now> wrote:
>>
>>>> EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
>>>> detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
>>>> specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
>>>> this is pushing it a bit.
>>>
>>> All very interesting though! ?
>>>
>>> Can you help with this question, Alan?
>>>
>>> https://discussions.ap
>>
>> thread hijacking attempt.
>
> Colour me shocked.
Try this one then:-
> On 2023-01-17 11:45, nospam wrote:
>> In article <lZzxL.20724$eRZ7...@fx06.iad>, David Brooks
>> <Davi...@a.loss.now> wrote:
>>
>>>> EXIF could be used for additional data, but would be more easily
>>>> detected. It could also indicate secretly to the receiver which
>>>> specific algorithm was used and which one-time pad key was used - but
>>>> this is pushing it a bit.
>>>
>>> All very interesting though! ?
>>>
>>> Can you help with this question, Alan?
>>>
>>> https://discussions.ap
>>
>> thread hijacking attempt.
>
> Colour me shocked.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252848419
nospam
Jan 17, 2023, 2:36:33 PM1/17/23
to
In article <tq6t2a$3c4r5$1...@hunterbd.eternal-september.org>, David
Brooks <Dav...@E-S.invalid> wrote:
> >>> All very interesting though! ?
> >>>
> >>> Can you help with this question, Alan?
> >>>
> >>> https://discussions.ap
> >>
> >> thread hijacking attempt.
> >
> > Colour me shocked.
>
> Try this one then:-
>
> https://discussions.ap
try foad.
> >>> All very interesting though! ?
> >>>
> >>> Can you help with this question, Alan?
> >>>
> >>> https://discussions.ap
> >>
> >> thread hijacking attempt.
> >
> > Colour me shocked.
>
> Try this one then:-
>
> https://discussions.ap
Carlos E.R.
Jan 17, 2023, 2:42:15 PM1/17/23
to
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Carlos E.R.
Jan 17, 2023, 2:42:15 PM1/17/23
to
> geoff
There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
geoff
Jan 17, 2023, 3:48:13 PM1/17/23
to
On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>
>> geoff
>
> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>
Not specifically.
> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>
>> geoff
>
> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>
¿ Y que ?
geoff
Carlos E.R.
Jan 17, 2023, 4:06:25 PM1/17/23
to
subject line by you.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Alan Browne
Jan 17, 2023, 4:53:50 PM1/17/23
to
See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing in
the open with a low probability of detection.
David Brooks
Jan 17, 2023, 7:16:12 PM1/17/23
to
On 17/01/2023 21:53, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>
>>>> geoff
>>>
>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>
>>
>> Not specifically.
>
> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>
> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing in
> the open with a low probability of detection.
Will running 'First Aid' in Disk Utility identify/erradicate
> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>
>>>> geoff
>>>
>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>
>>
>> Not specifically.
>
> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>
> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing in
> the open with a low probability of detection.
malware hiding in a Mac operating System?
--
Kind regards,
David
Carlos E.R.
Jan 17, 2023, 7:57:25 PM1/17/23
to
--
Cheers, Carlos.
nospam
Jan 17, 2023, 8:09:24 PM1/17/23
to
In article <3hsj9jx...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
absolutely nothing.
geoff
Jan 17, 2023, 10:13:20 PM1/17/23
to
EXIF metadata. Yes, smaller capacity and not as sophisticated as the
case in point.
But as I said, a novel use for EXIF data.
geoff
geoff
Jan 17, 2023, 10:15:19 PM1/17/23
to
On 18/01/2023 10:53 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>
>>>> geoff
>>>
>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>
>>
>> Not specifically.
>
> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>
> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing in
> the open with a low probability of detection.
But there is no reason that I could not include "NNNN is a dick" In
> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>
>>>> geoff
>>>
>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>
>>
>> Not specifically.
>
> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>
> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing in
> the open with a low probability of detection.
EXIF. Which is the point I was making, and not the point the article was
making.
geoff
David Brooks
Jan 18, 2023, 2:32:30 AM1/18/23
to
ended up here:-
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/254546074
Do you agree with the responses given?
TIA
David
Carlos E.R.
Jan 18, 2023, 4:53:11 AM1/18/23
to
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Carlos E.R.
Jan 18, 2023, 4:53:11 AM1/18/23
to
because it is not true.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Carlos E.R.
Jan 18, 2023, 4:53:12 AM1/18/23
to
people to read that.
Go an start a thread of your own in the appropriate Usenet group for
that pet subject of yours.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
David Brooks
Jan 18, 2023, 7:30:05 AM1/18/23
to
> Go an start a thread of your own in the appropriate Usenet group for
> that pet subject of yours.
What do you consider my "pet subject" to actually be, Carlos?
--
Kind regards,
David
Alan Browne
Jan 21, 2023, 6:00:28 PM1/21/23
to
esp. when linking an article in the post that describes something else.
geoff
Jan 22, 2023, 5:57:07 AM1/22/23
to
On 22/01/2023 12:00 pm, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2023-01-17 22:15, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 10:53 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>>>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geoff
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not specifically.
>>>
>>> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>>>
>>> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
>>> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing
>>> in the open with a low probability of detection.
>>
>> But there is no reason that I could not include "NNNN is a dick" In
>> EXIF. Which is the point I was making, and not the point the article
>> was making.
>
> I suggest you sharpen your points before making them in the future -
> esp. when linking an article in the post that describes something else.
>
Jeeze there are some pedantic fucks around here.
> On 2023-01-17 22:15, geoff wrote:
>> On 18/01/2023 10:53 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-17 15:48, geoff wrote:
>>>> On 18/01/2023 8:39 am, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-01-17 00:35, geoff wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geoff
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no mention of "EXIF" in the article.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not specifically.
>>>
>>> Because EXIF is not at all the method used. At all.
>>>
>>> See my other post about steganography ... which /is/ mentioned in the
>>> article. Because that is a pretty nice way to do this sort of thing
>>> in the open with a low probability of detection.
>>
>> But there is no reason that I could not include "NNNN is a dick" In
>> EXIF. Which is the point I was making, and not the point the article
>> was making.
>
> I suggest you sharpen your points before making them in the future -
> esp. when linking an article in the post that describes something else.
>
geoff
Carlos E.R.
Jan 22, 2023, 7:03:40 AM1/22/23
to
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Alan Browne
Jan 22, 2023, 10:06:19 AM1/22/23
to
Alan Browne
Jan 22, 2023, 10:06:51 AM1/22/23
to
0 new messages