Photoshop CS Adds Banknote Image Detection, Blocking?

Phosphor writes "A visitor to the Adobe Photoshop-for-Windows Forum (registration required to post, can log in as guest) has described a curious 'feature' with Photoshop 8 (also known as 'CS'). Seems this latest version of Adobe's flagship product has the built-in ability to detect that an image is of American currency. Something has been built into Photoshop's core coding that can detect something in images of currency and will prevent the user from opening the file. Apparently it will also do this with Euro notes; info on other currency is pending." According to other online reports, the latest version of Paint Shop Pro has similar restrictions, also known about since late last year.

Uhm.. So?

Am I the only one who doesnt see this as a huge problem? I could be missing something though.....

The promlem? Censorship!

Ok, the it starts with banknotes.
It continues with pr0n.
But where will it end?

Who has the right to decide what kind of image I view/edit? A law, praps a judge. Certainly not a sw-producer!

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Well, if you'd check the links in the news item you'd notice this is an enforcement of the law [treas.gov].

Plus the problem seems to only crop up when you go to print, so Photoshop isn't imposing any restrictions greater than the law does. You can still view and edit to your hearts content on the computer.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

When did it become Adobe's job to enforce the law at the expense of flexibility? (Albeit a small one)

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

When they volunteered by their own free will? Unless you know of a law that forces Adobe to do this, this is simply Adobe being a responsible company. Don't like it? Buy something else.

That would be the plan, yes. Or use something free. *cough* GIMP *cough*

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

*cough* PAIN*cough*ful *cough* UI *cough* from he*cough*ll.

I use gimp often when I don't want to wait/reboot for photoshop but every single time I do I find myself swearing and cursing at that clueless UI.

It feels as if their primary goal was to spread every bit of useful functionality over at least three different popup-dialogs each of which must be manually found and opened by the luser.

And I don't know of any project that'd be working to improve the situation.
I mean, someone repl^H^H^H^Hadd a GUI to it and it will be SO useful!

But no, everybody's too busy adding software alpha blending to kde (hell yea we needed that!) or building yet another browser.

Hm. I wonder how constant flaming affects my karma.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Unless you know of a law that forces Adobe to do this, this is simply Adobe being a responsible company. Don't like it? Buy something else.

Does anyone really buy photoshop anyway?

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

You wrote: Well, if you'd check the links in the news item you'd notice this is an enforcement of the law.. The law allows color reproductions of currency under certain conditions. From the page you cited:

U.S. Currency
The Counterfeit Detection Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550, in Section 411 of Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations, permits color illustrations of U.S. currency provided:

1. the illustration is of a size less than three-fourths or more than one and one-half, in linear dimension, of each part of the item illustrated;

2. the illustration is one-sided; and

3. all negatives, plates, positives, digitized storage medium, graphic files, magnetic medium, optical storage devices, and any other thing used in the making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof are destroyed and/or deleted or erased after their final use.

How does PS know what I'm doing with the currency if it blocks ALL use of it?

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

On the contrary, I think a software company deciding is much better than a legislator or judge. At least in the former case, you can choose a different piece of software. In the latter you have to leave the country.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Of course! Deny everything to that bunch of thieves and no-gooders, formerly known as "the users".

And next, the feature we're all waiting for: word processor detecting suspicious language and disabling printing of non-approved words. For good measure it will also insert some doubleplusgood slogans here and there.

You should change the name of your country to "United States of Authoritarianism" and be done with pretense of freedoms. It'll be cheaper theis way.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Do you know what is really scary about your post? That we are now just one small step from 1984. It is no longer a stretch to imagine what you just described, and this is true in most areas.

Just take the reality of present-day USA and push it one step further, only one miniscule step. And voila - instant totalitarian state.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

On the contrary, I think a software company deciding is much better than a legislator or judge. At least in the former case, you can choose a different piece of software. In the latter you have to leave the country.

Completely wrong in this software market. If you're a graphic designer, you use Photoshop. If the government chooses to legislate something, there are checks and balances and the ability of the people to fight it. If a company changes a product that you have to use, too fucking bad.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Bzzzzt! Sorry, wrong answer. If you have a set of custom filters you've created over the years, or work with certain production houses, you must use Adobe. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Though my experience with PS is limited, the industry functions about the same as the CAD world. If it's not in AutoCAD, it's not useable outside of your own little cadre of specialty companies. Nobody is willing to throw away (literally) $100k+ in manhours to choose, retrain, and recustomize a new application, just to then fight with every other vendor in the market over format incompatibilities.

Adobe = Microsoft = AutoDesk. If you're not using the standard, you will be wasting your companies money trying to interface with the rest of the world. Think you can change it? Try using methane to power your car. Then tell me how long it takes your mechanic and gas station to switch over to the "better, less restrictive" technology.

Better yet, switch all of your written and verbal communications to esperanto. It's just as good - maybe better! Just retrain your workforce, then retrain everyone you work with, convince your customers (in Esperanto only!) that it's a better language.

You get the point, I hope. If you are playing with your family pictures and printing them on your printer, any application you chose is fine. Once you have to interface with the real world, you choices are usually singular in number.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

If you don't like it, don't use it.

I don't think GIMP has this kind of limitiation.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

Check this [slashdot.org] out.

Ha, someone must have read your comment and said, "Hey, we need to release a new version for Negatyfus."

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

DAMN, I'm good!

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

I wasn't saying that The GIMP was at fault for allowing these operations. I was saying that if the commercial programs restrict the use to 'block counterfeiters' that it could be perceived that The GIMP (in not doing the same) is aiding counterfeiters. I *don't* think this is the case, but this is exactly the kind of thing that gets past people. There are people that think that it's fine for the government to spy on them, because only those doing something wrong should have something to fear.

What I was trying to get across is that many things that are possible in OSS can be (and are) used for less than legal purposes. Even though there are legitimate reasons to have that functionality, clueless lawmakers can use this as a wedge to legislate laws that make OSS difficult or impossible.

My point wasn't that The GIMP should add this "feature", but that it is a BAD THING that the commercial applications are, because it makes it look (to many people) like OSS is a 'hacker' tool and not something that "good, law abiding citizens" should be involved with.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

It continues with pr0n.

"Error: Processing images of the goatse man is illegal under the Large Anal Cavity Act."

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

I would like to see a nipple detector.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

> No one has the right to decide what kind of image I view/edit

Nope. But Adobe has the right to limit their software in any way they want.

Re:The promlem? Censorship!

First - get a dictionary and look up censopship.

I couldn't find it. I also couldn't find "promlem". Dang defective dictionary....

Re:I wonder why they did it.

Maybe the government requested it?

Re:I wonder why they did it.

Government requested that we put it in HP scanners several years ago. We refused as it was technically highly infeasible, if not outright impossible.

Re:Uhm.. So?

Am I the only one who doesnt see this as a huge problem? I could be missing something though.....

Guess it depends on what you're doing with it. I bet the marketing department of my first real job (a casino) would have problems with it - what else could you show in casino ads? I'd guess that banks, car dealers and especially those check cashing/usury lenders in the hood would like to do the same.

The problems are, the law defines how currency may and may not be reproduced and this goes beyond the law, it's not up to adobe to enforce the law, and since there are plenty of legitimate uses for photoshopping currency it's a crippled version that is apparently not disclosed anywhere external.

Re:Images not legal. Was: Re:Uhm.. So?

Not only are you flat out wrong about what the law forbids, I feel compelled to offer up the idea that not all laws are Constitutional. Now I doubt anyone has attempted to beat a forgery rap on that basis, since the Constitution specifically discusses punishing counterfeiting-- but the way the law is written may well violate the First Amendment.

As a comparable situation, while it is illegal to hack into other computer systems, tools that may aid in the process are quite useful to those discussing computer security issues. Indeed, published exploits for certain vulnerabilities are the best way to communicate to everyone involved exactly what is needed to exploit the vulnerability... and as such provide a sort of unit test as developers attempt to close the hole.

So back to money... why shouldn't currency collectors be able to scan and print images of money? Why shouldn't those writing cash handling policies at retail establishments be allowed to use currency images in their chapter on detecting forgeries? What about an artist making a statement about greed? But that's why the law allows for reproduction under a wide range of circumstances and why I think it's lame that Adobe would just go ahead and do this. I guess it's time for me to go see if the GIMP has a Paypal donation button.

Re:Uhm.. So?

1) would the marketing dept of the casino want to reproduce actual-size bill, or much-large-than-life? Reproductions are legal if either: partial; smaller than real; much larger than real; single sided.

2) If the law says "thou shalt not make a product that can copy money", then Adobe would be exhibiting gross negligence (at the very least) if their product was in fact able to produce lifelike copies of money.

I suspect very, very few people would ever realise that Photoshop was "crippled" in this way.

Re:Uhm.. So?

Let's see. What if I work for a large retailer and am tasked with creating an extensive presentation for the employees on the counterfit protections in the new currency. Yes, yes, they have pamphlets but my boss wants everyone well trained.

So I whip out my scanner and trusty photo shop, perhaps I can get some nice close-ups of those little protection.

This is rediculous to do. It won't stop the bad guys, they'll just use other software or and older version. However it can be really annoying for a legitimate user. BAAAH

Re:Uhm.. So?

Well, there are most certainly legit uses for banknote pics.

Ever try to buy numismatic items online? You really need a pic, both for identification (the note with Timashev's name is worth way more than the one with Shipov's) and for checking quality

Re:Uhm.. So?

Here's hoping that PhotoshopCS also prevents common folk from printing gold bullion!

Just imagine how the lives of the rich would be ruined if that were to start happening!

What's next?

'This application does not allow the unauthorized viewing of pornographic images...'

Re:What's next?

there goes me photoshopping various goatse images.

On the other hand, Fark might improve!

Re:What's next?

They shut down until an authorized tech can unlock them.

EXCELLENT!

Getting laid off? Shut down all the copiers in the office with that $20 bill in your pocket.

Have a lifelong dream of a Kinkos DoS attack? Good news!

Re:What's next?

Honestly, I am more interested in how they can recognize banknotes algorithmically. What happens if you put the note in at a 30 degree angle? What happens if you put the note in with another not overlappiong the edge a bit so that the aspect ratio is not the same. How do the ydeal with different resolutions. Will it work if I photograph a banknote and scan in the picture??

Re:What's next?

Honestly, I am more interested in how they can recognize banknotes algorithmically.

If you can detect faces in images by computing a database of eigenfaces, and computing an image's representation as a vector in the resulting so-called "face space", then I see no reason one cannot do this with eigendollars as well.


Mechanik

How it works

This is a copy of a post on the Adobe forum, which is now slashdotted:
---
Markus G. Kuhn - 03:45am Jan 8, 2004 Pacific(#106 of 110)

How it works:

For those of you curious about how this algorithm detects a banknote, here is a slide of a short talk that I gave to our local research group soon after I discovered the "EURion Constellation" two years ago while experimenting with a new Xerox color photocopier and a 10 euro note:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/eurion.pdf [cam.ac.uk]

The algorithm looks in the blue channel of a color image for little circles and most likely examines the distance distribution encountered. I have discovered a small constellation of just five circles (a bit like Orion with the belt starts merged) that will be rejected by a Xerox color photocopier installed next door from here as a banknote. Black on white circles do not work.

These little yellow, green or orange 1 mm large circles have been on European banknotes for many years. I found them on German marks, British pounds and the euro notes. In the US, they showed up only very recently on the new 20$ bill. On some notes like the euro, the circles are blatantly obvious, whereas on others the artists carefully integrated them into their design. On the 20 pound note, they appear as "notes" in an unlikely short music score, in the old German 50 mark note, they are neatly embedded into the background pattern, and in the new 20 dollar bill, they are used as the 0 of all the yellow 20 number printed across the note. The constellation are probably detected by the fact that the squares of the distances of the circles are integer multiples of the smallest one.

I have later been told that this scheme was invented by Omron and that the circle patter also encodes the issuing bank.

Re:What's next?

What if you scan one-centimeter blocks and re-assemble? Really, this is just stupid technology. People making funny money for real use will not be hindered. People doing art projects *will* be hindered. I guess we should get in the habit of not tossing our outdated software because who knows what hidden limitation will be in the latest version.

Somehow I can't help but think this is a government mandated "feature" spurred by the 9/11 Bush bills I've seen posted around towns.

Money-making application!

I just had a perverted idea. (That's usually a good sign.)

What if a porn actor/actress were to get a tattoo that contained the currency watermark -- that little 5 dot pattern? Hmm.. that would be dumb.

No... here's something dumb/ingenious: I've heard that some places are passing laws that require digital cameras to make a loud noise when taking a picture. This is in order to discourage sneaky perverts from taking a picture of you and then going home and jerking off to it, I guess. What about that guy at the bottom of the escalator, talking on his cellphone? Is he actually taking upskirt photos and then putting them on his website? People are apparently concerned about this enough that they are pressuring governments to do something about it, hence the "cameras must make a noise" legislation.

But someone might be peeking up your skirt with a "legacy camera" that doesn't make noise, and you would never know.

What is a modest girl to do? Wear currency watermark panties! Delightful little panties, covered with the five-dot "constellation" pattern. It seems only proper. Why, the only girls who don't wear our brand of panties, must be naughty exhibitionist immoral girls.

Do you want your daughter to wear plain white panties? I don't think so. Fortunately, I'm here to help you.

I'll make millions.

Don't copy machine have this feature too?

I remember hearing an urban legend that copy machines also have a secret counter that detects when money has been copied.

Re:Don't copy machine have this feature too?

A month ago I was joking to the guy installing Xerox printer/copier in the office about printing some nice shiny notes for Xmas shopping. He said that it's no problem (it won't shut down) but instead it will put hidden markers based on serial number of the machine. It might be because where I live it's only illegal to pass the fake money as real...

It's true

I try copying the new twenty on a Canon CL5000 and it came out black. Old twenty no problem. 100, too. This is USD.

Copiers have had this feature since 1987

We used to sell photocopiers in our family business around 18 years ago. I remember when the first copier came in, a Sharp, the police also came for a visit not too long afterwards. They wanted to know who was buying it, and expressly forbid either us or any customer from photocopying money. Now, we were very curious, so one of the salesmen took a Canadian $50 and copied the one side of an 8.5"x11" 20lb bond copier paper. To be honest, it was far too glossy to be passed off as a bill, and the paper didn't feel right. Still, in a stack of bills it could easily be passed over in a bill counter if it was properly aligned, which in and of itself was impossible. Essentially, it wasn't feasible. Anyway, fast forward to today, all color copiers come with a currency copying detection system. They detect the paper notes of most major currencies, and if anyone attempts to copy them, a flag is set in the machine such that the next time it gets serviced it actually informs the technician, who then informs the police. I believe some machines even cease operation until a technician is called. It's basically a big mess, so any potential criminal would still be better off using a PC with scanner and inkjet printer, which is how most counterfeiting is done AFAIK.

Re:Copiers have had this feature since 1987

I've run into this firsthand with a Canon copier, back around 1997 or so. According to the field tech that was called out for the incident, here's how it works:

The currency detection algorithm will print a black box over anything that it flags, and each time it does, it increments a counter that makes the detection algorithm more sensitive than it was before. Once that counter hits a certain magic number (apparently the actual number is not disclosed to anyone outside the manufacturer), the copier shuts down and a service call is required to re-activate it.

The field tech is is required to ask for a sample of the item that was being copied before entering the reactivation code, and the service provider is then required to file a report with the feds, along with the sample, I'm presuming.

Here's the kicker: very color copier prints a machine-readable watermark on every page it outputs in yellow toner carrying its manufacturer and serial number - you can see it with a loupe if you look hard enough (it looks like a line of morse code).

In our case, the suspect image had no resemblance whatsoever to currency of any form - what set it off was a dark green background color that was used that must have come too close to the green used in US bills. We were able to re-print the job by adjusting the color slightly with no problems once the copier was reset.

Re:Don't copy machine have this feature too?

They do. I work for a major manufacturer - all of our colur machines have this feature and will actually lock up, displaying an error code.
However - even if you managed to somehow work around this, there is still a way (which I will not disclose) to find out on what machine (manufacturer, model, serial number) a color copy was taken. Supposedly another legal requirement.
(And yes, I have seen it and does work...)

Just as Photoshop has this capability

So too, do I have the ability to tell American currency from other random images. If you have doubts about whether a document with an image on it in your wallet is American currency or not, please send it to me and I will verify whether it is American currency or otherwise.

I do this not for any personal gain, but only as a public service.

What a Shame

With this new feature, how will the rap industry design album covers for their artists?

Re:What a Shame

They'll have to switch over to the gold standard.

Re:What a Shame

They'll learn to use MS Paint in ways never before imagined.

Re:What a Shame

And you don't have to get around the chicken and egg problem of paying for Photoshop. How can you pay for it if you need the software to produce the money you intend to use for paying ;-)

Which ones?

Does this include, for example, the "new $20?" (Or the "old $20" that didn't have the cartoony numbers.) Or is it imprecise? Will different denominations work with it? Inquering counterf---minds want to know... ^.^

That'll stop those counterfeiters...

...who aren't smart enough to use older versions of their software!!

Re:That'll stop those counterfeiters...

I don't think they would include a complete copy of currency at all (and if I'm not mistaken, it's illegal to do so unless the image is 50% smaller, or 150% larger than an actual bill.)

What does that mean in a digital-image context, in which image sizes are determined by resolution, anyway? How many pixels are there across a US dollar?

Re:That'll stop those counterfeiters...

I'm guessing you haven't worked in graphic arts - at least not at a service bureau or print shop.

A continuous-tone image (photographic image) might look ok at ~100 dpi (or 36 pixels per cm) on your screen but it will be painfully obvious that it's a scan when you print it - even on a crappy 300 dpi laser or inkjet. You'll see the pixels.

A glossy magazine image, printed at a 150 or 175 line screen, is usually 300 dpi relative to the output size. But that's a halftone image - little dots and rosettes. If something consists mostly of line art - like an engraved bank note, you'll see stairstep "jaggies" visible to the naked eye until you get up into at least the 900 dpi range.

If I were attempting to accurately reproduce currency, I'd scan at the highest resolution my scanner could handle - around 4000 to 8000 dpi for a professional drum scanner.

Take a look at your currency - some of the decorative borders, such as the one around the portrait, are actually very small text, which becomes illegible if photocopied or scanned at low resolution. And for this purpose, 600 dpi is low resolution. 100 dpi would be garbage.

This isn't exactly new tech...

I believe many photocopiers have somewhat similar detection and preventitive measures for people trying to copy U.S. currency (printers too I have heard). Really this is one of those things that I know people will gripe about, but I cannot see a single real scenario where this truly makes a problem for anyone.

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

hold a bill under a blacklight

Every run-of-the-mill grocery store I've been to recently has checked my 20 or 50 euro bills with a blacklight. The blacklight lamp has been placed so that when the clerk takes your bill he'd have to make an effort not to move it under the light.

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

Ever had a retail job?

People who handle hundreds or thousands of bills a day are exactly the ones who will instantly notice small variations without even consciously checking. Even if your print looks "good enough", it almost certainly won't *feel* right.

Changing the currency probably only worsens the problem. If people get used to the idea that money changes all the time, they'll be willing to take any random thing you offer them. We've already got three versions of the same denomination in circulation right now; they'd better not change it again for at least a few decades.

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

Have you heard about Woz and his sheet of $2 bills? [woz.org]. If you like carrying $2 bills, then consider going the whole hog and really getting to know the local law enforcement personel.

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

This is interesting...and so typical of people looking a reason to get all flustered for the sake of just blustering against "Big Brother", et al....no matter how weak or baseless the reasons.

Security invasion? Privacy invasion? Where? This is not a case of Photoshop sending a report of your attempt to make a copy of currency, it's simply a step that Adobe is taking to try and help be one of the "good guys". I fail to see how you can claim that counterfeit efforts using cheap (comparitively), easily obtainable hardware and software is not a problem...especially when several news items have stated that this *is* in fact a rising problem. Literally less than a week ago I watched a story on the local news about convenience store owners being passed fake 20's that were only spotted when doing the daily books or readying the deposits. In a busy environment, the money duplication doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to pass a quick glance and feel like 1 of the 1000 some odd variations in currency texture from wear and tear (circulation). It clearly is a problem, and even if not epidemic, it is still a real and valid concern.

Yes, you can use GIMP or other programs to avoid this, yes there are far more sophisticated methods to making fake currency. Adobe has decided to take some form of action to do their part to not be a tool used for this.

Invasion of security and privacy? Again...where? Do you understand the meaning of these words?

I respect the decision made by Adobe, and refer to my original point...at this time, being that this only affects trying to copy currency, I see no legitimate complaint or impairment of functionality, or "invasion" of any kind.

Besides, on another level, if Adobe continues directing all of their attention towards preventing currency fraud, it means less effort on troublesome protection efforts that keep me from pirating their software.

oops...did I just type that?

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

It's a tool that doesn't work right and that has arbitrary restrictions built into it that are not disclosed. What's next - looking for a little RIAA watermark in an image and refusing to work on those?

There's a typical argument trotted out of "there's no legitimate reason to do X therefore you shouldn't complain if you are prevented from doing X". Typically it just shows a lack of imagination for the person making the argument. There are many good reasons why I might want to work with an image of currency. My child might be writing a report for school about money. I might like to have pictures of money on my desktop. When my wife gave birth here in Japan we had to pay the hospital bill in cash. I have a picture of hundreds of 10,000 yen bills since I'll probably never have that much in cash in hand again. What's wrong with me taking that picture and using it?

We're starting to see more and more software that won't allow you to do "X" because someone thinks it's naughty. We stand at the beginning of a new age as products become "smarter". The political thinking and attitudes that we develop now about products that are "good guys" preventing us from committing crimes will be with us for some time. Would you like automobiles that do not allow you to speed? How about a hammer that refuses to break windows?

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

Yes, it does prevent many of them. Since you can't scan the bill, how do you ever get it to the point where you can change it to comply with the law?

Your other point, about not buying the product, is valid. However, if the information is not disclosed to you how can you make an informed decision?

You talk about a "group of people" telling a manufacturer that they cannot produce and sell a particular product. This is called advocacy. How does a manufacturer learn that it's products are not well received if no one is ever supposed to say anything? How will the market ever learn enough to avoid products that do bad things if no one brings the subject up? We have the right to say "this is bunk!" You have the right to ignore it and buy Photoshop if you like.

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

What happens if I want to make a backup copy of a note that I have in my wallet? At least if my wallet is lost or stolen i will have a backup of the cash that was inside there!

Re:This isn't exactly new tech...

but I cannot see a single real scenario where this truly makes a problem for anyone

When I wanted to copy currency was when I was contructing a three dollar bill, and I was going to use other currency as a template.

One legit application I can think of for scanning currency would be for collectors who wish to archive their collection. At one point I had a 1986 Canadian $2.00 bill... near as I can tell they switched to a two and one dollar coin a long time ago. While you might consider this nutty... imagine stamp collectors. Legit enough hobby.

I wanted to show it to someone, who was a canadian, and did a scan, making sure I put on it in bold friendly letters "copy copy copy copy".

That reminds me, I do have some out of print currency I should take the time to scan. Unique images should be saved.

Will localized versions "detect" local currency?

Now, aside from the fact whether this is a good or a bad feature, but will localized versions of Adobe photoshop CS be detecting local currency, or will they only have routines for U.S. dollars?

I don't want to feel left out, what if I wanted to use photoshop to make some fake Canadian money? :D

Re:Will localized versions "detect" local currency

I did some more tests. Not only will this stop opening an image such as this image [pbx.mine.nu], but it will also NOT allow pasting any significant portions of the above image, or !!! not even let you paste in a SCREENSHOT of windows image viewer opening that said image.

Wow! They must be doing these does-this-look-like-money checks on every operation on the image that involves getting image data from outside the application! Crazy.

Re:Will localized versions "detect" local currency

Ok,

I had a bit of a play with your jpg (thanks BTW). It seems that its looking for certain features - if you open it in paint and then cut and paste there is a limit on the size of the "chunks" you can paste in. Especially from the face or the shield. However by taking small enough bits (9 or 10) you can cut and paste the whole image in.
inverting and rotating (as far as paints minimal abilites go) have no effect.

Why?

Not only is this rather invasive, as other posters have commented, but what's the point? I mean, their are dozens of other much better anti-counterfeiting measures on today's currency. So why have this "feature" at all? It really seems like a waste to me.

Re:Why?

Because those measures still fail. Especially in dark places like bars where it's hard to see the anti-counterfeiting measures in the bills. Pass a half-decent phony note on a busy night, and you're almost guaranteed to get away with it.

this has been pulled of with high-quality scanners and printers in the past - just copy the note on fairly thick printer paper, then distress it a bit to give it the texture of a used bill. Hence the reason why this is being built into better scanners and laser printers nowadays. Consumer inkjet printers are also good enough to do this, but don't have the electronics to do any decent detection. This is probably the reason it's being built into Photoshop now.

This is not enough

These kinds of restrictions must be placed in hardware (although I think it is idiotic in nature anyway) if it must be enforced, because I could scan it, save it onto the hard drive, load up Gimp (or any other unrestricted software), change the serial number (or add other alteration), and send it to the printer.

I think the hardware I describe does exist, somewhere... perhaps someone can enlighten us about those.

Oh yeah, I do wonder what might happen if somehow this 'feature' may prevent opening of normal, user files (although unlikely).

Hmm... how about any possible DMCA issues surrounding all this?

GIMP = Counterfeit tool?

And next week the govt labels GIMP as a tool for counterfeiting - evil open source terrorist tool etc... :)

m0n0p0ly

Does this include Monopoly money? I keep running out of it so I occasionally print out a little more. I believe the Microsoft monopoly does something similar... I would guess that's what they wrote MS Paint for.

It does nothing about Monopoly money, though.

Well, at least at this stage of the game, Photoshop can't recognize Monopoly money. Boardwalk here I come!

pshaw.

Bet it won't stop those images I've been using to run off fake quarters...

Recipes for counterfeiting

Seems this latest version of Adobe's flagship product has the built-in ability to detect that an image is of American currency

In other news: counterfeiters worldwide embrasse free software, the Gimp to receive funding from certain american-italian associations ...

WTF are you on?

What are you blathering on about? The Euro notes have far better anti-counterfeit measures on them than the uniqueness of the images on them. Perhaps you've not seen one, but they have metallic foil elements, watermarks, etc that would be impossible to fake without some serious hardware.

You might be able to pass off a fake US note easily enough in the right conditions (dim lighting in a busy, smokey bar) but you'd have to find a blind barman to be able to pass off your colour laser copies of a Euro note as the real thing: as far as I'm aware, nobody makes a laser printer that lets you emboss silver foil onto (and into) a piece of paper.

You're whole "unique arches to avoid confusion with holiday snaps" argument is ridiculous too. The reason why the Euro notes have images of various styles of European achitecture thoughout the ages on them (Gothic, etc) is because those styles are generic enough to be found across the continent. If you had specific pieces of achitecture on the notes, say a 10 Euro note with the Eiffel Tower on it and a 20 Euro note with the Leaning Tower of Pisa on it, then you'd find countries getting into pissing contests over whose monuments shoud appear on the highest value notes. You'd also run out of note values before you ran out of countries, and thereby alienate any countries that weren't represented.

WTF? When was that released?

Maybe I was living in a cave but when was Photoshop Counter Strike released ???

Re:WTF? When was that released?

About twelve seconds after Photoshop Preemptive First Strike.

Well, sure...

But they didn't go far enough! They should also prevent you from editing images of coins!

Reminds me of a joke... A counterfeiter accidentally prints up a batch of $18 bills. He figures, what the heck, and heads off into the mountains to find some hillbillies, figuring they don't know anything about money anyway. He runs across a couple of them sitting on a porch, rolls down his window, and shouts, "Any of you got change for an $18 bill?"

One of them shouts back, "Sure do! You want 3 sixes or 6 threes?"

Re:Well, sure...

heads off into the mountains to find some hillbillies, figuring they don't know anything about money anyway. He runs across a couple of them sitting on a porch, rolls down his window, and shouts, "Any of you got change for an $18 bill?"

One of them shouts back, "Sure do! You want 3 sixes or 6 threes?"

This story is obviously an urban legend : what self-respecting mountain hillbilly would have known 3x6=18?

Interesting news but...

...as if this has truly long-term effects. I suppose counterfeiters might prefer photoshop, but what about those that prefer Gimp? I guess since Photoshop stands in their way, then Gimp will become their new favorite.

Time and time again it is generally not the ink but the paper that most needs duplication when attempting counterfeit. I see this as a silly waste of resources. Generally speaking, if I or just about anyone I know were inclined to do anything with the image of currency, it'd probably be to deface it in some way... or maybe put my face in there... who knows what cheesy thing that has been done a hundred times before.

The point is, even though there's not likely to be a huge public outcry about this, this does offer a pretty interesting blow to free expression. Who influenced the action?

Won't work in Poland.

Three days after releasing the new dollar, a forger was caught by Polish police. He made a $1, "hand-made", just for skills and proof-of-concept, but Polish police detected hard to notice mistakes. US police experts when asked about authenticity of the bill couldn't believe it was forged as it passed all their tests and only after pointing out the mistakes by polish experts they admitted it's forged.

Re:Won't work in Poland.

This has the feel of an urban ledgend here.

First of all, the $1 bill hasn't changed for over fifty years (except for some signatures on the bottom of the bill). It is still pretty much identical to even when it was a Silver Certificate (pre WWII currency) although there were several (subtle) changes made when it became a Federal Reserve Note. Several $1 bank notes issued in the 19th Century by the US Treasury could probabally still be used today because of the similarity of the bill design, and it would be identifiable as a $1 bill.

Almost all of the new redesign efforts have been with the $20, $50, and $100 demoninations. Higher denominations do exist for US currency but are restricted from use by ordinary citizens (by IMHO stupid laws but that is another story). So if this was a genuine forgery it was never with a $1 bill.

In addition, you are suggesting that this bank note was passed outside the USA (hence the involvement of the Polish Police and not the US Secret Service) and it was done just after the release of the new currency when anybody is still trying to recognize the new bills. Keep in mind, if it was a forgery of one of the new notes, it would go through a bunch more review and be checked out more, simply because of the novelty of the note. That is not something a forger would really want to have happen.

Also, when you talk about "US Police Experts" you need to describe which of the 10,000 police agencies in the USA they were from? There are seven (yes, 7) local (not a part of the US federal government) police agencies with seperate budgets, different government bodies that they report to, and independent juristiction authorities that govern what happens when I walk out my front door in a small backwater part of the USA. There may even be more, but I don't know the names of all of them. I do know that the Secret Service (yes, the same agency that also acts as presidential body guards) does have personnel based in American Embassies to help assist governments that the USA has diplomatic relations with to examine US currency and to facilitate currency exchange with those countries. (not directly, but to encourage the exchange and otherwise authenticate US currency outside the US territorial boundaries).

That said, I have seen news reports of someone drawing out on paper with just a ball-point pen a copy of US currency. It was even called "art" and has been appraised to be more valuable than the denomination that was reproduced. Is this what you mean by "hand-made"?

Attention counterfeiters!

Attention counterfeiters: I have old versions of image-editing software for sale! The price just doubled but you don't have much choice now, do you? Payment by cash only ... uh, never mind.

Not only that....

It also simultaneously emails the FBI so they can come and question you.... Vee have Vays of makking eue Taulk!

So how will they design new currency?

I was watching a show on the History Channel about counterfeiting, and they were interviewing one of the designers of United States bills. The graphical workstation he used? Photoshop on a Mac (black & white G4, it looked like).

I hope Adobe has a special version for the Treasury Department that doesn't have this restriction!

Re:So how will they design new currency?

They are probably using a cracked version they downloaded from Usenet.

WTF?

Is it illegal or something to scan and alter images of money? I can see the advertising world getting into troubles. It is illegal in holland at least to make reproductions of money so if you print a note you make it an absurd size. No one is gonna mistake a poster for a real a banknote. Or you discolor it or make it an odd amount (27 euro notes)

Point is I have seen and still see plenty of ads in wich bank notes are displayed. So how are you now supposed to make that art?

If this is true and I smell april fool then I think this is a sign of insanity. Criminals won't be stopped by this.

Re:WTF?

and I suppose a big pyramid with a disembodied eye embedded in it is perfectly nornmal and not at all spooky? ;-)

Re:WTF?

Generally, any US documents such as currency, stamps, drivers licenses, etc. can only be legally reproduced at greater then 150% or less than 75%. I work in a print shop and just read through the copyright rules. Apparently, you can't so much as reproduce your own senior pictures without permission from the photographer who took them.

But the question is "what's the incentive?"

You've got to ask what the incentive is for Adobe (and Jasc, et al) to go through all the R&D to develop this feature.

Unless the application developer actualy increases sales of their product through this feature then why bother?

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy nut (where's my tinfoil hat anyway?), if this is of benefit only to the reserve bank then how was Adobe/Jasc/Xerox/etc convinced to implement this?

The only real problem is PERFORMANCE.

Photoshop scans every image, and even the clipboard, for banknotes. Since the algo seems to be pretty smart (rotation etc. doesn't matter) i guess it's rather slow. People have been reporting that CS is slower than PS7 on the adobe forums for a while, i guess now we know the reason.

Panties-in-a-bunch

From the article: However, Photoshop CS refuses to open the image, and provides an error message regarding the (il)legality of currency reproduction and an "information" button that takes you to the web.

All I can say is my panties are definately in a bunch over this!! I have some pretty ugly relatives. What if Photoshop gives me error messages regarding the following: "Your family is so unattractive that we are redirecting you to the web where you can pick out better-looking people to populate your Adobe Family Photo Album.

It could happen.

Re:Panties-in-a-bunch

Hmmm. New potential revenue source for Adobe: Recognize watermarks in images and direct you to a website where you can buy a licensed copy of the image...

In other news...

A group of GNU hackers implements a "compatibility" plugin with this mode for GIMP. Hackers worldwide are asked to send in notes of all currencies and nominals. As the authors say: "Of course the solution will be completely open-source. For now it is in alpha stage though. It correctly recognises my Monopoly notes, but Frank has donated a worn $1 and the test result was negative."

Activation.

I find it interesting that the Slashdot community is upset about this 'protection from counterfeiting', but isn't up in arms about the required product activation [adobe.com]. With more than half of SlashDot using the Windows platform, you'd think there would be more concern about this.

Re:Activation.

Even more distressing, when I read through all of Adobe's licensing drivel is the part about where the activation is stored. It seems much like TurboTax's activation scheme, from the initial details.

From Adobe:

"Q: Do I have to reactivate if I reformat my hard drive?

A: As long as you don't "low-level" reformat your hard drive, you will not be required to reactivate Photoshop CS software. Please note that normal utilities (provided by the operating system vendor) for reformatting the hard drive do not perform a "low-level" reformat."

Mac version doesn't have this misfeature

I tested the Mac PS CS version and it had no problems scanning and opening a 600DPI file of the new $20. And before anyone subpoenas /. for my personal data, I only copied one side, never printed it, and destroyed the data afterwards, which is perfectly legal.

I thought it might be part of the Digimarc plugin, I usually delete those but I forgot to do it on the new version. So it's not part of Digimarc, they're present on my machine's installation of Photoshop. I guess this currency-detection thing is only on the PeeCee version.

What ELSE does PS CS can for?

How do you know it only scans for banknotes? Maybe it scans your private pictures for known terrorists and sends the information during the next product activation? Next thing you know a SWAT team raids your house because your uncle Pete, who has a long beard, looks like a terrorist to PS CS.

What if you have pictures of chemical elements needed to make biological weapons on your computer? Does PS CS know you're a chemistry student?

Go ahead, make tinfoil hat jokes all you like, but do you know it's only limited to banknotes?

Why would counterfeiters edit the image?

If you're trying to counterfeit money, why would you be loading it up into photoshop to edit it in the first place? I rather though counterfeit money was supposed to be identical to the originals. Maybe this would have been better implemented in printer hardware (or just not at all, cos it's dumb).

The only reason I've ever edited images of currency was to produce joke bills with somebody elses face on them, or 1,000,000 notes.

Ran into similar problem

I was using Photoshop 7.0 on OS X and ran into a similar problem. I was scanning a Versace ad from a magazine (it was for a random class project), and I needed to be able to blow up a portion of the ad a reasonable amount. I planned to put it on a large print, so I scanned at 800dpi. Photoshop apparently saw some sort of watermark in the ad itself (or the magazine page, it was in one of those gigantic fashion mags with like 500 pages, 8 of which are content) and refused to allow me to do anything with it other than resizing. I scanned at a lower dpi (400), and was able to circumvent the problem. Seemed kind of ghetto to me, though. I haven't tried it under CS, but I'll bet the watermarks exist there, as well.

Re:Ran into similar problem

The watermark detection has been a feature of Photoshop for quite a while - since 4.0 if I recall correctly.

MT.

Two obvious projects

The first obvious project is to locate and trivially disable the check. This is no harder than disabling routine anti-piracy checks, and we all know those are solved within hours of release.

The second, and far more interesting project is to the reverse engineer the check itself. It would be facinating to see the US government's own algorithm for flagging/detecting US currency. It would then be almost trivial to embed a false "US currency" flag in almost any image. You could post your entire porn collection on the web with an invisible bogus "US currency" watermark :D

-

Money now, corporate logos next.

Just wait until Adobe gets payed off to include corporate logos from being scanned or altered either. Seems far fetched? Well...just read my sig.

Secrecy is the point here.

What is worrying here is not the fact that this feature was built into Photoshop but that it was done secretly. This kind of secret arrangement between companies and government has long tradition in the US, but think about other nice features that can be put into closed source software as a result. Some may not be as easy to detect.

Card Scanners too

I recently evaluated several models of color card scanners to scan drivers licenses and when I misplaced my license I grabbed a bill out of my wallet and tried to use that to test.

Much to my surprise, the bill got about 30% in before the was a pause and the rest of the scanned image was blank. I tried again and got the same results. I turned it around, all four orientations and got the same results. About 1/3 of the bill goes in then scanning would either stop or go blank (depending on scanner).

Curious, I cut out piece of post-it and put it over different parts of the bill. I found that putting a piece over either the beginning edge of the portrait, the entire bill would scan, albeit with yellow section. By repeating it, I could in theory stitch together a complete bill.

This made me wonder...is there something that the Secret Service has forced image scanning and editing providers to adopt? These were all rather cheap scanners, a couple seemed like overseas knock-offs. Yet they all seemed to exhibit the same behavior! That seems a remarkable coincidence.

Perhaps there is a barcode or something near the portait, perhaps not visible to the human eye, but completely noticeable to a scanner (some kind of moire pattern or whatever). Something that is consistant enough to flag in the scanner drivers.

Then again, flat scanners don't seem to have this problem, although the story goes that each will embed its information into the scans to allow for tracking.

Anyway...maybe I'll just hang on to my ancient Asus a while longer...I don't necessarily care to scan money or not...but if *someone* can get this kind of image checking in the drivers of half a dozen card scanners...who knows what else *someone* can get in there?

- JoeShmoe
.

http://www.treas.gov/usss/money_illustrations.shtm

.. which is linked from the site the error message refers you to says you CAN make full-colour copies of US currency, as long as the image is single-sided and at least 75% smaller or 150% larger than a real note.

Counterfeit tool

This could be used more of as a tool by counterfeiters to check if their bills look good enough!

Demo Image + Confirmation

Yep, just confirmed it myself.

I did a simple google search, and downloaded the first image of a banknote I could find:

http://aes.iupui.edu/rwise/banknotes/euro/EuroPN ew -100Euro(N)-2002-donatedpw_f.jpg

I get the "this software does not support the unauthorized proccessing of currency" message. And may I ask how it knows its unauthorized?

Can anyone comment on the legality of cracking such a protection? It would seem insane any sane legal system to forbid me to instruct my own CPU to carry our a few NOP's instead of a CJNE, but as the DMCA has proved, many countries do not have sane legal systems.

Re:Algorithm for spotting UK/EU currency...

I copied the text below directly from Markus Kuhn in the forum linked in the original article, yes, those same dots are now on US currency:

For those of you curious about how this algorithm detects a banknote, here is a slide of a short talk that I gave to our local research group soon after I discovered the "EURion Constellation" two years ago while experimenting with a new Xerox color photocopier and a 10 euro note:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/eurion.pdf

The algorithm looks in the blue channel of a color image for little circles and most likely examines the distance distribution encountered. I have discovered a small constellation of just five circles (a bit like Orion with the belt starts merged) that will be rejected by a Xerox color photocopier installed next door from here as a banknote. Black on white circles do not work.

These little yellow, green or orange 1 mm large circles have been on European banknotes for many years. I found them on German marks, British pounds and the euro notes. In the US, they showed up only very recently on the new 20$ bill. On some notes like the euro, the circles are blatantly obvious, whereas on others the artists carefully integrated them into their design. On the 20 pound note, they appear as "notes" in an unlikely short music score, in the old German 50 mark note, they are neatly embedded into the background pattern, and in the new 20 dollar bill, they are used as the 0 of all the yellow 20 number printed across the note. The constellation are probably detected by the fact that the squares of the distances of the circles are integer multiples of the smallest one.

I have later been told that this scheme was invented by Omron and that the circle patter also encodes the issuing bank.

What's Next?

Can they add a feature to detect porn so the chicks in the magazines arent digital airbrush creations? Show off those tats, scars and mutant limbs! Btw, what if you are working on a patterned mask that it decides is too money like? What about art? What about if you need to make some fake money image for a website or raffle or something? Adobe has really gone to the shitter, from what I've heard from insiders.

Activation?

With all of the "techniques" Adobe uses to secure, protect, and "manage" their software (DMCA, active "online" activation, etc.), it wouldn't be a far stretch for them to simply notify the proper authorities/Treasury Department. when you decide to try to copy a piece of U.S. currency. I know many (all? perhaps it is mandatory now?) copiers are required to flag the date/time/etc. when currency is copied on their machines. When a service technician comes in to repair the unit, or perform regular service, they are required to report this list of dates/times to the local authorities, who handles it from there.

Why wouldn't it be possible for Adobe Photoshop CS (or any other commercial, proprietary, non-Open Source) application to just report it automatically, online, via a couple of small UDP/TCP packets to the proper authorities? Not only will they get your machine name, serial number of the software, IP address, provider, etc. but we're all connected anyway, you probably wouldn't even see the packets go across.

Just something to think about.

Forum slashdotted, original post

No Wonder Photoshop CS Seems Slow - It's Analiyzing Images For Content!

Brian NoSpam - 10:02am Jan 7, 2004 Pacific

We received a TIFF image from a customer, of a $20 bill. The image does
*not* violate any laws regarding reproduction of currency (it's not even
close to actual-size, and it's not a "flat" portrayal - it's wavy, as if
it's fluttering in the wind. Nor is it real-color.

However, Photoshop CS refuses to open the image, and provides an error
message regarding the (il)legality of currency reproduction and an
"information" button that takes you to the web. (Photoshop 7, of course,
has no such qualms).

What the hell is this? In my book this is completely unacceptable -
Photoshop is an image editor, not a censor, government policy enforcer
or anything else.

Adobe, you've got some explaining to do.

Brian

FWIW, one legitimate use

I work at an large investment bank, doing graphics. Guess what one of the analysts' favorite images is? The final designs never are confused with the real thing (although there is occasionally the guy who wants something modified for an internal joke). For one thing, we almost always end up using small portions of bills in collages, and they are printed off-color and off-size to avoid snagging on the fair-use copyright law.

But we still have to start from the base root-of-all-evil image. And using portions of the bills means scanning them in at higher resolution as the fragments are used larger than normal. I just tried pasting the image somebody posted into a new copy of Mac version of Photoshop CS (this jpeg has "specimen" written on it twice). PS CS pops up dialog: "This application does not support the unauthorized processing of banknote images."

Can we still copy little fragments? How about taking high-res photos and pasting in? Our department haw always used common sense regarding fair use and never had a problem; we do high-volume output, and don't have time to screw around with this stuff. Thanks for making our life harder, Adobe! You just lost one upgrade sale, because I will make sure we keep a copy of PS 7 specifically to circumvent this hassle.

A market to serve

Well, this makes it pretty clear that there's a niche market that could be served here. Simply need to come up with a Photoshop clone that doesn't discriminate against counterfitters. And man, I bet they'd be willing to pay a lot for that. Cash, under the table. Excellent!

Re:A market to serve

Considering what they do for a living, I think I'd rather get a check.

--
Benjamin Coates

back up currency

But I only copy banknotes for backups!

Ultimately becomes a pain for the end user

I have had a similar experience with Illustrator. I had to embed some eps figures (complex math equations made from latex, with fonts embedded in the eps). Acrobat shows the pdf fine, but illustrator has a lot of problems.

Turns out that Illustrator doesn't want people to use unauthorized fonts. So, I copy the latex fonts to distiller directory and try to view the equations -- they are messed up, because latex shifts the fonts a bit (characters in the fonts) to accomodate other viewers, and that shifted font table is inside the eps. So, I get strange characters in the equations *after taking care of putting in the fonts at the right place*.

I believe in this case, the rule was, "thou shall not pirate fonts." Doesn't matter if the fonts are
20 yr old fonts in public domain.

Over simplified rules "thou shall not photocopy money" are similar in spirit to the Talebanesque rules like "thou shall not look at another woman's face". Duh, I may be the only doc around and if the woman has a tumor on her face (or other, more private parts), I should be able to see it to cure it.

S

Funny

I opened a very detailed image of a 50 dollar bill yesterday to create this [irni.net] for a fark photoshop contest. It didn't stop me from opening the much larger picture of the 50 and copying it into the jobs/mayer picture. I used PhotoshopCS. Guess this story is bogus.

Just paper money?

This also stops you from printing coins. After failing to scan a dollar bill, I attempted to use four quarters instead. This failed about 50 cents in, so I tried to use nickels instead. I managed to scan 65 cents in this time, probably because some of the coins were more worn, but it still failed.

Fortunately, it seems to be possible to use multiple types of coins to form a complete dollar, and even at higher resolutions! Unfortunately, most tellers will not accept coins made out of paper, no matter what the DPI resolution is. The consistency of metal has proven very difficult to replicate with paper, even laser jet paper.

As a final attempt to copy money, I wrote myself a check for $1, endorsed it, and attempted to scan it in. Unfortunately, I had previously printed my own checks using PS 6 with a "dollar bill" background image, and while there was some banding on the left side (I was running low on ink ad obviously couldn't afford to buy a new cartridge), Photoshop CS will not allow me to scan in these checks. I'll be ordering a new book of checks with the "Standard Blue" design from my bank; however this costs nearly $16 and I need to print up some money to buy these checks first.

This is a fantastic opportunity!

I'm guessing (hoping) that the detection mechanism relies on some optical property of banknote paper, rather than simple recognition of features on the bill's surface. For instance, maybe it's able to detect microprinting or those little colored threads embedded in the paper.

If we can find out specifically what property causes Photoshop to recognize a bill, we can add that property into all of our images, thereby rendering them unopenable in Photoshop! The sinister and nefarious open-source bandits could write a worm that, after infecting a machine, would alter every image file on the system so that it was unopenable. Photoshop would become a useless application, and The GIMP would reign supreme!

Re:Sucks to be you (you="proprietary software user

Exactly. A would-be counterfeiter would just use a different program. Unless there is going to be mandatory currency note detection in all libraries for reading and displaying images, this is not gonna work very well at all. And even if it was mandatory, someone would remove the code from libjpg, libpng etc and make it available on your favorite p2p network..

So, really, this approach is fundamentally flawed. Gave a few coders an interesting challenge, though!