How to ensure the authenticity of a picture?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}
Many times I face images on the Internet or spread on social networks like Facebook and twitter.
How to check that those images are right I mean not processed in photoshop?
Firstly I check that those images are related to the specific event by using Google image searching but after that I want to make sure that those images not processed through some image editing tools like photoshop.
photos images image-manipulation
migrated from webapps.stackexchange.com Apr 11 '13 at 11:30
This question came from our site for power users of web applications.
add a comment |
Many times I face images on the Internet or spread on social networks like Facebook and twitter.
How to check that those images are right I mean not processed in photoshop?
Firstly I check that those images are related to the specific event by using Google image searching but after that I want to make sure that those images not processed through some image editing tools like photoshop.
photos images image-manipulation
migrated from webapps.stackexchange.com Apr 11 '13 at 11:30
This question came from our site for power users of web applications.
add a comment |
Many times I face images on the Internet or spread on social networks like Facebook and twitter.
How to check that those images are right I mean not processed in photoshop?
Firstly I check that those images are related to the specific event by using Google image searching but after that I want to make sure that those images not processed through some image editing tools like photoshop.
photos images image-manipulation
Many times I face images on the Internet or spread on social networks like Facebook and twitter.
How to check that those images are right I mean not processed in photoshop?
Firstly I check that those images are related to the specific event by using Google image searching but after that I want to make sure that those images not processed through some image editing tools like photoshop.
photos images image-manipulation
photos images image-manipulation
asked Apr 11 '13 at 7:46
Anyname DonotcareAnyname Donotcare
38431121
38431121
migrated from webapps.stackexchange.com Apr 11 '13 at 11:30
This question came from our site for power users of web applications.
migrated from webapps.stackexchange.com Apr 11 '13 at 11:30
This question came from our site for power users of web applications.
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
There are several solution for image authentication. The simplest way is by checking the EXIF. It doesn't validate the image as unedited, but if an EXIF tag left by Photoshop or other software is found, you can be sure the image is edited.
The law-accepted method is by using camera that sign the picture it took. Of course this won't detect optical manipulation, but at least it's good for ensuring forensic photo aren't tampered when the photo itself is taken by trusted officer. Also, when the private key is leaked, boom, every image is now suspect.
A more general method would be detecting the fluctuation in the image statistics. Software for such method can be extremely expensive for forensic situation or could be free. Then again, they won't actually detect an optical manipulation.
add a comment |
Authenticating a digital image is not an easy task and it depends on how far you want to go with it. First of all it is needed to understand at which level you want to verify the originality of a picture.
Do you want it to be the exact image created by the camera without any alteration (camera-original)? In that case if you uploaded it to Facebook it won't be an original anymore, as Facebook servers will likely recompress it, resize it and add some tags.
There are several methods to verify if the image is a camera-original or not and some are actually very simple, for example:
- check if the format and resolution is supported by the camera
- check if EXIF metadata are present and respect the settings provided by the camera
- check that EXIF metadata don't contain any suspicious software tag containing words like "Photoshop"
- check that the JPEG compression settings (quantization tables) are compatible with the ones of the images generated by the suspect camera
Checking if the pictures are camera-original is quite quick, but we must remember that a skilled attacker with the proper software will be able to fool your analysis. It may be quite easy to modify the EXIF data of an image to make it appear original, but it may be less obvious to encode a tampered image with the camera settings without altering original camera file structure.
The other problem is that you may not care at all that the image is not a camera-original (for example because it has been resized) but you are only interested about the fact that its content has not been faked, for example removing an object or adding a person.
In this case you won't analyze the only the file format and metadata but the actual pixels to perform different kinds of analysis that take into account image statistics and other mathematical properties of the image.
The analysis can be done at a global level or at a local level.
In general, a global analysis will tell you if the image has been modified, but won't tell you where. Conversely, a local analysis may be be able to tell you where exactly the image has been modified.
The most reliable results will be obtained comparing the image under analysis with other pictures coming from the same device that it's supposed to having taken the photo. Analysis techniques based on pixels are much more difficult to fool that the ones based on format, but it's not impossible.
In a forensic setting we won't be able to tell in absolute terms that an image is an original, but only that we weren't able to find any evidence that the image is not an original.
There are not many tools available for image authentication: other than the ones cited by Martheen, you can also take a look at my company's product Amped Authenticate (http://ampedsoftware.com/authenticate).
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f581365%2fhow-to-ensure-the-authenticity-of-a-picture%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There are several solution for image authentication. The simplest way is by checking the EXIF. It doesn't validate the image as unedited, but if an EXIF tag left by Photoshop or other software is found, you can be sure the image is edited.
The law-accepted method is by using camera that sign the picture it took. Of course this won't detect optical manipulation, but at least it's good for ensuring forensic photo aren't tampered when the photo itself is taken by trusted officer. Also, when the private key is leaked, boom, every image is now suspect.
A more general method would be detecting the fluctuation in the image statistics. Software for such method can be extremely expensive for forensic situation or could be free. Then again, they won't actually detect an optical manipulation.
add a comment |
There are several solution for image authentication. The simplest way is by checking the EXIF. It doesn't validate the image as unedited, but if an EXIF tag left by Photoshop or other software is found, you can be sure the image is edited.
The law-accepted method is by using camera that sign the picture it took. Of course this won't detect optical manipulation, but at least it's good for ensuring forensic photo aren't tampered when the photo itself is taken by trusted officer. Also, when the private key is leaked, boom, every image is now suspect.
A more general method would be detecting the fluctuation in the image statistics. Software for such method can be extremely expensive for forensic situation or could be free. Then again, they won't actually detect an optical manipulation.
add a comment |
There are several solution for image authentication. The simplest way is by checking the EXIF. It doesn't validate the image as unedited, but if an EXIF tag left by Photoshop or other software is found, you can be sure the image is edited.
The law-accepted method is by using camera that sign the picture it took. Of course this won't detect optical manipulation, but at least it's good for ensuring forensic photo aren't tampered when the photo itself is taken by trusted officer. Also, when the private key is leaked, boom, every image is now suspect.
A more general method would be detecting the fluctuation in the image statistics. Software for such method can be extremely expensive for forensic situation or could be free. Then again, they won't actually detect an optical manipulation.
There are several solution for image authentication. The simplest way is by checking the EXIF. It doesn't validate the image as unedited, but if an EXIF tag left by Photoshop or other software is found, you can be sure the image is edited.
The law-accepted method is by using camera that sign the picture it took. Of course this won't detect optical manipulation, but at least it's good for ensuring forensic photo aren't tampered when the photo itself is taken by trusted officer. Also, when the private key is leaked, boom, every image is now suspect.
A more general method would be detecting the fluctuation in the image statistics. Software for such method can be extremely expensive for forensic situation or could be free. Then again, they won't actually detect an optical manipulation.
answered Apr 11 '13 at 8:09
Martheen Cahya PauloMartheen Cahya Paulo
1,2471924
1,2471924
add a comment |
add a comment |
Authenticating a digital image is not an easy task and it depends on how far you want to go with it. First of all it is needed to understand at which level you want to verify the originality of a picture.
Do you want it to be the exact image created by the camera without any alteration (camera-original)? In that case if you uploaded it to Facebook it won't be an original anymore, as Facebook servers will likely recompress it, resize it and add some tags.
There are several methods to verify if the image is a camera-original or not and some are actually very simple, for example:
- check if the format and resolution is supported by the camera
- check if EXIF metadata are present and respect the settings provided by the camera
- check that EXIF metadata don't contain any suspicious software tag containing words like "Photoshop"
- check that the JPEG compression settings (quantization tables) are compatible with the ones of the images generated by the suspect camera
Checking if the pictures are camera-original is quite quick, but we must remember that a skilled attacker with the proper software will be able to fool your analysis. It may be quite easy to modify the EXIF data of an image to make it appear original, but it may be less obvious to encode a tampered image with the camera settings without altering original camera file structure.
The other problem is that you may not care at all that the image is not a camera-original (for example because it has been resized) but you are only interested about the fact that its content has not been faked, for example removing an object or adding a person.
In this case you won't analyze the only the file format and metadata but the actual pixels to perform different kinds of analysis that take into account image statistics and other mathematical properties of the image.
The analysis can be done at a global level or at a local level.
In general, a global analysis will tell you if the image has been modified, but won't tell you where. Conversely, a local analysis may be be able to tell you where exactly the image has been modified.
The most reliable results will be obtained comparing the image under analysis with other pictures coming from the same device that it's supposed to having taken the photo. Analysis techniques based on pixels are much more difficult to fool that the ones based on format, but it's not impossible.
In a forensic setting we won't be able to tell in absolute terms that an image is an original, but only that we weren't able to find any evidence that the image is not an original.
There are not many tools available for image authentication: other than the ones cited by Martheen, you can also take a look at my company's product Amped Authenticate (http://ampedsoftware.com/authenticate).
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
add a comment |
Authenticating a digital image is not an easy task and it depends on how far you want to go with it. First of all it is needed to understand at which level you want to verify the originality of a picture.
Do you want it to be the exact image created by the camera without any alteration (camera-original)? In that case if you uploaded it to Facebook it won't be an original anymore, as Facebook servers will likely recompress it, resize it and add some tags.
There are several methods to verify if the image is a camera-original or not and some are actually very simple, for example:
- check if the format and resolution is supported by the camera
- check if EXIF metadata are present and respect the settings provided by the camera
- check that EXIF metadata don't contain any suspicious software tag containing words like "Photoshop"
- check that the JPEG compression settings (quantization tables) are compatible with the ones of the images generated by the suspect camera
Checking if the pictures are camera-original is quite quick, but we must remember that a skilled attacker with the proper software will be able to fool your analysis. It may be quite easy to modify the EXIF data of an image to make it appear original, but it may be less obvious to encode a tampered image with the camera settings without altering original camera file structure.
The other problem is that you may not care at all that the image is not a camera-original (for example because it has been resized) but you are only interested about the fact that its content has not been faked, for example removing an object or adding a person.
In this case you won't analyze the only the file format and metadata but the actual pixels to perform different kinds of analysis that take into account image statistics and other mathematical properties of the image.
The analysis can be done at a global level or at a local level.
In general, a global analysis will tell you if the image has been modified, but won't tell you where. Conversely, a local analysis may be be able to tell you where exactly the image has been modified.
The most reliable results will be obtained comparing the image under analysis with other pictures coming from the same device that it's supposed to having taken the photo. Analysis techniques based on pixels are much more difficult to fool that the ones based on format, but it's not impossible.
In a forensic setting we won't be able to tell in absolute terms that an image is an original, but only that we weren't able to find any evidence that the image is not an original.
There are not many tools available for image authentication: other than the ones cited by Martheen, you can also take a look at my company's product Amped Authenticate (http://ampedsoftware.com/authenticate).
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
add a comment |
Authenticating a digital image is not an easy task and it depends on how far you want to go with it. First of all it is needed to understand at which level you want to verify the originality of a picture.
Do you want it to be the exact image created by the camera without any alteration (camera-original)? In that case if you uploaded it to Facebook it won't be an original anymore, as Facebook servers will likely recompress it, resize it and add some tags.
There are several methods to verify if the image is a camera-original or not and some are actually very simple, for example:
- check if the format and resolution is supported by the camera
- check if EXIF metadata are present and respect the settings provided by the camera
- check that EXIF metadata don't contain any suspicious software tag containing words like "Photoshop"
- check that the JPEG compression settings (quantization tables) are compatible with the ones of the images generated by the suspect camera
Checking if the pictures are camera-original is quite quick, but we must remember that a skilled attacker with the proper software will be able to fool your analysis. It may be quite easy to modify the EXIF data of an image to make it appear original, but it may be less obvious to encode a tampered image with the camera settings without altering original camera file structure.
The other problem is that you may not care at all that the image is not a camera-original (for example because it has been resized) but you are only interested about the fact that its content has not been faked, for example removing an object or adding a person.
In this case you won't analyze the only the file format and metadata but the actual pixels to perform different kinds of analysis that take into account image statistics and other mathematical properties of the image.
The analysis can be done at a global level or at a local level.
In general, a global analysis will tell you if the image has been modified, but won't tell you where. Conversely, a local analysis may be be able to tell you where exactly the image has been modified.
The most reliable results will be obtained comparing the image under analysis with other pictures coming from the same device that it's supposed to having taken the photo. Analysis techniques based on pixels are much more difficult to fool that the ones based on format, but it's not impossible.
In a forensic setting we won't be able to tell in absolute terms that an image is an original, but only that we weren't able to find any evidence that the image is not an original.
There are not many tools available for image authentication: other than the ones cited by Martheen, you can also take a look at my company's product Amped Authenticate (http://ampedsoftware.com/authenticate).
Authenticating a digital image is not an easy task and it depends on how far you want to go with it. First of all it is needed to understand at which level you want to verify the originality of a picture.
Do you want it to be the exact image created by the camera without any alteration (camera-original)? In that case if you uploaded it to Facebook it won't be an original anymore, as Facebook servers will likely recompress it, resize it and add some tags.
There are several methods to verify if the image is a camera-original or not and some are actually very simple, for example:
- check if the format and resolution is supported by the camera
- check if EXIF metadata are present and respect the settings provided by the camera
- check that EXIF metadata don't contain any suspicious software tag containing words like "Photoshop"
- check that the JPEG compression settings (quantization tables) are compatible with the ones of the images generated by the suspect camera
Checking if the pictures are camera-original is quite quick, but we must remember that a skilled attacker with the proper software will be able to fool your analysis. It may be quite easy to modify the EXIF data of an image to make it appear original, but it may be less obvious to encode a tampered image with the camera settings without altering original camera file structure.
The other problem is that you may not care at all that the image is not a camera-original (for example because it has been resized) but you are only interested about the fact that its content has not been faked, for example removing an object or adding a person.
In this case you won't analyze the only the file format and metadata but the actual pixels to perform different kinds of analysis that take into account image statistics and other mathematical properties of the image.
The analysis can be done at a global level or at a local level.
In general, a global analysis will tell you if the image has been modified, but won't tell you where. Conversely, a local analysis may be be able to tell you where exactly the image has been modified.
The most reliable results will be obtained comparing the image under analysis with other pictures coming from the same device that it's supposed to having taken the photo. Analysis techniques based on pixels are much more difficult to fool that the ones based on format, but it's not impossible.
In a forensic setting we won't be able to tell in absolute terms that an image is an original, but only that we weren't able to find any evidence that the image is not an original.
There are not many tools available for image authentication: other than the ones cited by Martheen, you can also take a look at my company's product Amped Authenticate (http://ampedsoftware.com/authenticate).
answered Apr 12 '13 at 7:18
martjnomartjno
19617
19617
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
add a comment |
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
The product page says Amped Authenticate will only be available to government agencies. Will there be a version for commercial entity?
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 17 '13 at 3:52
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
We don't have yet defined the details. It may be available to some selected organization, but given the sensible field we are working in, it won't certainly be available to the general public. If you want more precise info please contact me privately.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 7:49
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
Oh. My current work isn't related with image forensic. I just thought that news media in particular will be interested, and they're not in the government
– Martheen Cahya Paulo
Apr 19 '13 at 9:38
1
1
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
The subject can be of great interest for news media, but the approach for forensics is different and that is our focus now. For the future, let's see. Thanks.
– martjno
Apr 19 '13 at 13:15
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f581365%2fhow-to-ensure-the-authenticity-of-a-picture%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown