I didn't know Tineye could tell if an image was violent or not.

The existing systems work for copyright purposes, finding a similar match.
This works to some extent currently, and can handle recompression, scaling, etc...
It falls apart when an adversary wants to get around it however.

But for the case that this legislation is targeting, i.e. taking down violent video, fingerprinting is useless.
It's brand new content - completely impossible to detect in advance.
You can only remove the content after it's been distributed for quite some time, not pre-emptively which is what the politicians want.

On 10/4/19 11:16 am, Paul Wilkins wrote:
https://tineye.com/search/f274c3b49edcca9a6d83994a43629445a5ea5a23/

On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 11:12, Matt Palmer <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:56:12AM +1000, Paul Wilkins wrote:
    > Now I would say that for instance, if the eSecurity Director
    posts the CRC
    > of a file as being "abhorrent violent" content, and your company
    doesn't
    > expeditiously take down that material, expect problems down the
    pike. I
    > doubt a CRC check alone is sufficient.

    Given that a CRC changes if you modify any bit of the file, and
    common CRC
    implementations have a space of either 16 or 32 bits (65,536 and
    ~4 billion
    possible values, respectively), "insufficient" doesn't even begin to
    describe such a scheme.

    > I'd say a fingerprinting system to
    > match altered copies of the subject file should be implemented.

    Once again with this magical "figerprinting" scheme.  Nothing like
    what
    you're describing actually exists.  Further, there's no point in each
    company coming up with their own scheme for calculating this magical
    fingerprint, because if the eSecurity Director wants to say "take down
    everything like this fingerprint" they have to use the *same*
    scheme to come
    up with the same fingerprint.

    > It doesn't have to work in all cases.

    It won't work in *any* case.

    > I am not a lawyer. This is not expert advice.

    Yes, I think that is quite evident.

    - Matt

    _______________________________________________
    AusNOG mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog


_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
--
Nick Stallman
Technical Director
Email   [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Phone   02 8039 6820 <tel:0280396820>
Website         www.agentpoint.com.au <https://www.agentpoint.com.au/>

        
Agentpoint <https://www.agentpoint.com.au/>
Netpoint <https://netpoint.group/>

Level 3, 100 Harris Street, Pyrmont NSW 2009 Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/agentpoint/> Twitter <https://twitter.com/agentpoint> Instagram <https://www.instagram.com/Agentpoint/> Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/agentpoint-pty-ltd>

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

Reply via email to