Each of these reads like an extremely horny and angry man yelling their basest desires at Pornhub’s search function.

  • gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a programmer, I gotta say, that’s probably not technically feasible in a sensible way.

    Every camera has got to have an embedded key, and if any one of them leaks, the system becomes worthless.

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, that would actually be feasible with enough effort.

      The real question is what do you do if someone takes a screenshot of that image? Since the picture must be in a format that can be shown, nothing is stopping people from writing software that just strips the authentication from the camera file.

      Edit: misread the problem. You need to get a private key to make forgeries and be able to say “no look, this was taken with a camera”. Stripping the signature from photographs is the opposite of what we want here.

      • Savaran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point is, without the signature then there’s plausible deniability that it wasn’t real. If you want to prove something happened, then it should have a signature and be validated.

        If someone is showing off a screenshot of an image then in the future (now really) one probably needs to assume it’s fake unless there’s some overriding proof otherwise.