• nyan@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    You may be able to prove that a photo with certain metadata was taken by a camera (my understanding is that that’s the method), but you can’t prove that a photo without it wasn’t, because older cameras won’t have the necessary support, and wiping metadata is trivial anyway. So is it better to have more false negatives than false positives? Maybe. My suspicion is that it won’t make much difference to most people.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      A fair few sites will also wipe image/EXIF metadata for safety reasons, since photo metadata can include things like the location where the photo was taken.

    • WolfLink@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Even if you assume the images you care about have this metadata, all it takes is a hacked camera (which could be as simple as carefully taking a photo of your AI-generated image) to fake authenticity.

      And the vast majority of images you see online are heavily compressed so it’s not 6MB+ per image for the digitally signed raw images.