• Winter_Oven@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think maybe an update to the image format standards, where it like somehow includes a hash of the instrument that has taken the photo and video, and thus, only such media that can be verified to have been taken by a physical instrument can be used in like legal matters, or reporting or journals.

    Either this hash can be verified by some algorithm, or maybe the media could depend on this hash in such a way that the media is corrupted if it gets altered.

    • scratchee@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The obvious limitation being that you can take a real photo with attestation with a real camera of a real computer screen displaying any fake shit you can imagine, then you have an officially hashed photo of anything.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There are already plans for metadata signing. I think some high end Canon cameras might do it already. It basically allows proof (via public private key of the hash) that a particular camera took that photo.

      The idea is that you can create a chain of custody with an image. Each edit requires a new signature, with each party responsible for verifying the previous chain, to protect their own reputation.

      It’s far from perfect, but will help a lot with things like legal cases.