Onion Information

Page Clicks: 0

First Seen: 03/11/2024

Last Indexed: 10/22/2024

Domain Index Total: 313

/g/ - Technology Nanonymity = Anonymity + Privacy + Security [Make a Post] Nanonymous Image Posting Nanonymous 2021-08-31 15:15:38 No. 49686 [D] [U] [F] [S] [L] [A] [C] >>49697 File: ba3280d3e2d35264913b52f65fd9b6f9b236b3a117daa604cfc475fca222961b.jpg ( dl ) (86.48 KiB) How would you go about taking pictures in real life and uploading them to nanochan without compromising your anonymity? I would like to take pictures of interesting stuff I see and do sometimes, it would make discussing hobbies so much better but I worry about data hidden in the images. I've seen nanons use cheap chinese webcams, which are probably as good as it gets, I don't know what artchat uses for his videos and images. But the problem with USB webcams is that you can't really use them when not at your desk, I would like to have something I can use outdoors. I own a cheap (((smartphone))) but despite running only free software on it I don't trust that thing. The camera could have easily built something into it that slightly changes the values of some pixels to create a unique id encoded in the image. And how do you need to process the images before uploading? A little bit of compression and downscaling probably doesn't hurt, of course you need to remove all exifdata, maybe shift the colors a little bit as well? And lastly, what would you take pictures of to share here if you had the technical possibilities? Nanonymous 2021-08-31 16:22:48 No. 49697 [D] [U] [F] >>49865 >>62771 File: 5afbc0c9ea07a90fb8d0e42be1298833ec4ea292d558960cca4cef1ae0ffb477.jpg ( dl ) (53.72 KiB) >>49686 >The camera could have easily built something into it that slightly changes the values of some pixels to create a unique id encoded in the image. It doesn't matter if every picture can be tracked to the same camera as long as the camera can't be tracked to your real identity. Anão 2021-08-31 18:40:33 No. 49699 [D] I don't think that messing with the image itself it's necessary. Removing metadata is enough. The main worry would be the content of the photos themselves. Like, never taking outdoor photos and making shure there's nothing recognizable in the photo like shipping boxes, outlets and this kind of crap. What are you trying to share exactly? Videos seam way more troublesome. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 22:41:57 No. 49710 [D] >>49714 >>49771 >The camera could have easily built something into it that slightly changes the values of some pixels to create a unique id encoded in the image. That is simply how digital cameras are, it is not something you have to build in into it, at least according to this article. https://www.bbcnewsv2vjtpsuy.onion/future/article/20210324-the-hidden-fingerprint-inside-your-photos You are already a namefag, the different pictures would be connected anyways, but you should use a camera you never used to take pics that have been connected to your IRL identity. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 22:55:57 No. 49713 [D] >>49717 Webcams, phones? What the hell? Just get a regular digital camera. For a very dedicated attacker, after removing EXIF I'd still assume the camera's default settings can be used to determine its model. But that's it, you then blend in with millions of people who own the same model. >I own a cheap (((smartphone))) but despite running only free software on it They still have buttloads of proprietary firmware, including for the camera IIRC. >And how do you need to process the images before uploading? Don't, or you correlate all your posts to the same unique settings. Use the default for your camera. >And lastly, what would you take pictures of to share here if you had the technical possibilities? Anything except street signs, roads, buildings, nature, soil, wildlife, the sky, electronics, non-international products... Pretty much nothing. Watch a skilled GeoGuessr player and see for yourself how they can narrow down that kind of information to a specific city or a street. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:06:26 No. 49714 [D] >>49715 >>49710 Yes and no. It's like saying that every bicycle, manufactured the same, is unique... Some measurements could be taken to help future identification. Later on, some estimates could be made about wear and tear, and you could build an argument that it was a particular bicycle you measured in the factory. If I had to do this, I would identifiably tweak lens distortion correction for each camera. But this would be difficult, because there is no mistaking that this is what you are doing in your factory flow. For me, I do distort and anti-alias pictures I get from the internet or intend to post to the internet. In my opinion it doesn't have to be much. un-filtering an image has a much higher complexity than filtering it and might not have a definite solution without some contextual knowledge. Metadata is a problem in that video formats in general have backdoor information leak "features" built into them, as do photos. They are marketed to the cattle as "wow, [company] automatically tags your exact location and knows your movement patterns!" Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:11:37 No. 49715 [D] >>49718 >>49812 >>49714 >I do distort and anti-alias pictures I get from the internet Why? They aren't yours and you can be fingerprinted this way, not to mention the quality loss Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:13:10 No. 49717 [D] >>49719 >>49713 >you then blend in with millions of people who own the same model Maybe not. https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/human-rights/facebook-can-track-who-you-know-using-the-dust-on-your-camera-creepy-patent/ Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:24:38 No. 49718 [D] >>49720 >>49767 >>49775 >>49715 Say if I downloaded a meme from nanochan, I want it to be costly to identify a picture I have or posted as having come via nanochan. We are being (((studied))) after all. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:33:45 No. 49719 [D] >>49717 Hm, you could wipe the dust off before every photo and buy new lens if you scratch them. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:36:51 No. 49720 [D] >>49721 >>49722 >>49723 >>49718 Having just revealed that here, you now correlate every picture you alter. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:51:47 No. 49721 [D] >>49720 My feeling is that at nanochan, a nanonymous forum I want to freely share and exchange knowledge, ideas and code. In a flock, when one notices a threat they launch into action to alert the rest of the flock. It was originally thought to be an act of self-sacrifice, but it turns out to be harder for the hunter to kill anyone at all once the flock is more aware. It is in Google's interest for us to just sit nervously on our hands while they murder our friends, hoping our murder will be somewhere towards the middle. Nanonymous 2021-08-31 23:53:24 No. 49722 [D] >>49720 and nah, you're crazy. The cost is very high to say well now we can directly match the image/hash .. but for that guy, do some sort of blurry comparison and if it matches it's him. : In this scenario, I have succeeded. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 00:11:51 No. 49723 [D] >>49720 I'm positive he isn't the only one doing this. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 05:23:09 No. 49767 [D] [U] [F] >>49768 File: e194dab7d999a1834e50d2a61d5f4ed2a2f5cdd2ba5e32749b530111a1dab8e7.jpg ( dl ) (36.41 KiB) >>49718 I've been here long enough to see images get recycled, and I've realized all the images people posted to nano were probably also downloaded from elsewhere too. We are all taking part in one giant distribution machine from one anon the next, and nanochan is yet another small piece of it. I'm considering adding a "first posted to nanochan in $current year" to all my OC with steganography pic unrelated Nanonymous 2021-09-01 05:28:57 No. 49768 [D] >>49769 >>49767 pills Nanonymous 2021-09-01 06:06:07 No. 49769 [D] >>49770 >>49768 as usual, shitspammer can't into reading comprehension Nanonymous 2021-09-01 06:07:22 No. 49770 [D] >>49769 pills Nanonymous 2021-09-01 14:39:04 No. 49771 [D] >>49772 >>49710 >street signs, roads, buildings, nature, soil, wildlife, the sky kek do you really think muh IQ>9000 glowies will be able to get your name and home address from an image of soil? The geoguessr masters are only able to get the location from a combination of these things and even then you wouldn't know if nanon just visited that place once or if his home is within a hundred miles of that location. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 14:54:13 No. 49772 [D] >>49773 >>49774 >>49771 Who said it has to be just one piece of information? A vague location can be determined and a profile can be built over time. It's for the same reason we don't just post which city we live in outright. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 15:00:33 No. 49773 [D] >>49772 >It's for the same reason we don't just post which city we live in outright. Langley here. Come one let's all share our locations and meet. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 15:08:59 No. 49774 [D] >>49777 >>49772 How would you build a profile over time if identities don't exist on anonymous IBs? Nanonymous 2021-09-01 15:41:45 No. 49775 [D] >>49780 >>49812 >>49718 but who is to say the meme originated from nanochan? at closer inspection it could be found out that it is actually from ifunny, and nobody would be able to tell it ever passed by nanochan or another website (unless the website edits the image somehow) even if an image DOES originate from nano and there is metadata or something on it that proves that, it doesn't mean you got it from nano, someone could have shared it elsewhere and you got it there Nanonymous 2021-09-01 16:13:12 No. 49777 [D] >>49774 Correlation. Posting identifying pictures is only one of many possible opsec failures. Then you have stylometry and passive traffic analysis that don't even require bad opsec. Nanonymous 2021-09-01 19:56:06 No. 49780 [D] [U] [F] >>49819 File: 05745bec81027f467c4529362a272d8b8d3a70e3d88a637dda1e1fdd9ab4611b.jpg ( dl ) (41.32 KiB) >>49775 But if you are a hate group whose product is (((finding))) topical bad posts on nanochan, ancillarily you will catalogue images that appeared on nanochan. An obvious customer is police wanting to create a hate charge. If you slightly change images you download, this (((police))) strategy becomes much more costly to operate. Picrel is explicitly doing that. >49813 >>49775 It'd only be suspicious if you connect a lot of nano images to your identity. >>49715 Lens fingerprinting has already been used as evidence in criminal cases. The research papers say they need multiple reference images from that camera before they can start identifying individual images. Identification is resistant to JPEG compression and resizing. Judging from their descriptions of how it works, I'd bet it's also resistant to image noising and other basic filters, but maybe not distortion. Nanonymous 2021-09-04 00:06:24 No. 49813 [D] >>49812 I mean, in some sense we're talking about deconvolution in all these cases right? That's why I throw that distortion curveball in there. Nanonymous 2021-09-04 14:40:37 No. 49819 [D] >>49780 >never shared personal prose Did you not go to school? Nanon