Photoshop CS Adds Banknote Image Detection, Blocking? 1059
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? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That'll stop those counterfeiters... (Score:2, Insightful)
The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
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:That'll stop those counterfeiters... (Score:2, Insightful)
Interesting news but... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
But the question is "what's the incentive?" (Score:4, Insightful)
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?
Re:Sucks to be you (you="proprietary software user (Score:3, Insightful)
So, really, this approach is fundamentally flawed. Gave a few coders an interesting challenge, though!
Re:Uhm.. So? (Score:5, Insightful)
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:So how will they design new currency? (Score:1, Insightful)
Now that would be impressive software!
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This isn't exactly new tech... (Score:5, Insightful)
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... (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
WTF are you on? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Activation. (Score:3, Insightful)
What ELSE does PS CS can for? (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:Uhm.. So? (Score:5, Insightful)
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:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:1, Insightful)
Why would counterfeiters edit the image? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:That'll stop those counterfeiters... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This isn't exactly new tech... (Score:4, Insightful)
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:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think GIMP has this kind of limitiation.
Secrecy is the point here. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why would counterfeiters edit the image? (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah, but you forgot about serial numbers. If all the notes have the same serial number, then all the counterfit notes can be traced back to you if you are caught/suspected. If you vary the serial numbers, it's much harder for authorities to find you.
Re:This isn't exactly new tech... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:WTF are you on? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you have made a real good copy of your bank note, a blind bar man might be the one person to detect your fraud.
How many people tried this tonight? (Score:2, Insightful)
My experience:
I scanned a crisp new $20 at various resolutions, color and black and white, from the TWAIN interface in Photoshop, and Photoshop CS refused to handle the image. It simply displayed a warning dialog and suggested visiting www.rulesforuse.org [rulesforuse.org]. The bill did scan as line art, so the algorithm must do some fine detail pattern matching, as opposed to detecting colors or sizes.
The bill was successfully scanned into Paint Shop Pro 7. Even when printed at 1440dpi, it is obviously counterfeit, but that didn't stop me from accidently mistaking it for the real bill when I had set it aside for a few minutes while doing other work. And this is simply printed on one side on normal inkjet paper, cut out freehand with scissors, and not even color matched.
So I guess the real lesson here is if you tell someone you can't do something, they are more likely to try it out. I just saw a show on the History Channel about the history of US currency, and afterwards, I didn't even have the slightly notion of scanning and printing out a bill. But here I am, after skimming an article on Slashdot, with a fake (but probably passable [thesmokinggun.com]) $20 bill.
Now I'm an adult, and I understand the necessity of preventing counterfeit currency and the punishment given to counterfeiters, so I have no desire to do anything more than this quick test. But I can only imagine how many 14 year olds are cranking out their own bills tonight, thanks to Adobe!
Counterfeit tool (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This isn't exactly new tech... (Score:5, Insightful)
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:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be the plan, yes. Or use something free. *cough* GIMP *cough*
Re:That'll stop those counterfeiters... (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, using best judgement, a scale of 36 pixels per cm (91.44 per inch) [worked out to be a 1:1 copy of our image size at 1024x768], gives an image of 558 pixels by 234 pixels.
Note, the above is approximate, and can be obtained at higher accuracy with a ruler and some time
You are right about the fact that resolution determines the pixels across, the above being a sample at 104x768; however, using phsical dimentions, the program could then have an internal list of cm/inches to pixels on the most common resolutions, and use that (or even a fourmula, which I'm sure that we could work out given a bit of time).
NeoThermic
Re:What's next? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What's next? (Score:4, Insightful)
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
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
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:What's next? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well, sure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:GIMP = Counterfeit tool? (Score:2, Insightful)
Parent was modded as +5 funny. I don't think this is funny at all!
The only thing that allows PhotoShop to be modified like this is the closed source nature of the product. This approach will almost certainly be used in a future attack on open source software.
Activation? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:5, Insightful)
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! (Score:2, Insightful)
The GUI is much improved. I don't use it enough to say whether or not it is good, but it sure suits me much better.
Plus, I rather think Photoshop's GUI is rather cluttered... YMMV I guess.
Re:What's next? (Score:4, Insightful)
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:Uhm.. So? (Score:3, Insightful)
The law says you can't kill people. But we still have guns. Obviously gun makrs are exhibiting gross negligence by making such deadly products. And knife makers. And spoon makers. And car makers. And everything else.
It's not up to a company to enforce laws. For one thing, everything has an illegal use. Also, what's illegal here may not be illegal elsewhere. Go to Iran and see if anyone stops you from counterfieting US $$$. They won't, and Photoshop shouldn't.
But you know what? All these restrictions in proprietary software are great. They just encourage people not to use them. I know that I can make counterfiet money (as an aside, photoshop + printer can't print color changing ink and microprinting, etc. so why does anyone care!?)
Ultimately becomes a pain for the end user (Score:5, Insightful)
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
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Defense in depth is good security (Score:3, Insightful)
Changing Photoshop to block currency images is a pretty weak measure, but it is one more obstacle for casual forgers and for semi-sophisticated ones.
The Mint has avoided the trap of depending on the strength of any one security measure by having many anti-forging techniques. Counterfeiters face obstacles every step of the way.
"Enough empty generalities!", you say. "Just how does this help?". It means that someone who's figured out how to defeat the dozens of better measures now has to learn to use the Gimp. Plus it blocks the script-kiddie types who'd otherwise be using color copiers.
It's like a six-foot fence in front of a minefield. Not decisive, but adds a little.
By the way, currency security is an interesting subject in itself. There's a spectrum of anti-forgery techniques. Many are full-disclosure, so that both cash business and counterfeiters know about them. Another set is used for more careful checks at banks. A few are done as security-through-obscurity, known only to a few people and meant to catch technically sophisticated forgers without inside knowledge.
The Mint has been doing information security for a long time, even before there were computers. They're worth studying.
Re:Images not legal. Was: Re:Uhm.. So? (Score:4, Insightful)
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:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:4, Insightful)
Nope. But Adobe has the right to limit their software in any way they want.
Re:This isn't exactly new tech... (Score:2, Insightful)
Ryan Stultz
It's Not Censorship (Score:2, Insightful)
Suppose Photoshop did block more benign things, like pr0n. You do not have to buy Photoshop. You can use other photo editing tools. And if there are no alternative programs then you are free to write your own photo editor if you are able to. No one has a right to photo editors, rather we have a right to pursue photo editors. Like you don't have a right to happiness, but rather the right to the pursuit of happiness. The right *to* other things is more commonly known as "looting". So in truth, no one is stopping you from looking at whatever you want to look at. You just may have to go through a little bit more effort to achieve what you want. There's no such thing as a free lunch. We must earn what we desire.
Now suppose that government stepped in and decided what you can and cannot see. Now you no longer can use other photo editors nor can you write your own. Souind familiar? This is the mentality that caused the DMCA to come into being. Now *that* is actual censorship!
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:4, Insightful)
Just take the reality of present-day USA and push it one step further, only one miniscule step. And voila - instant totalitarian state.
Re:Uhm.. So? (Score:3, Insightful)
"If you didn't want to print counterfeit money, why are you using The GIMP?"
You missed what he said (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
The law says you can't kill people. But we still have guns. Obviously gun makrs are exhibiting gross negligence by making such deadly products. And knife makers. And spoon makers. And car makers. And everything else.
But that's not what he said (and I can't believe someone modded it up without reading what the previous poster said, even though it was quoted right there.)
I'll state it differently, just in case you missunderstood what the previous poster said: If the law says you can't make a product that can copy money, that's the law. If the law says you can't kill, then nothing prevents you from making a product that can kill. You miss the difference - one covers the product directly (can't make something that copies money), the other covers potential uses (can't kill). VERY different situations.
Read. Think. Post. While it's not always the way people do it, it helps a lot ;-)
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:3, Insightful)
So customers don't have the ability to fight Adobe's decision to implement this in any way?
They can't write to the company and demand that the feature be removed?
They can't vote with their wallets by sticking with an earlier version of the software instead of upgrading?
If this were a REAL sticking point, instead of a mere ideological whinge from the more libertarian members of the community, another software company would GLADLY step in and stake a claim on the graphic design market. No, GIMP isn't a Photoshop-killer yet, but after a couple years of development funding from a commercial entity, it very well could be.
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting. So when I scan in a $20 to make a joke bill (following all the other rules) with my little sister's face on it, I'm obligated to destroy said $20?
Re:It's true (Score:2, Insightful)
Canon and other high-end copier/printer [MFD - multifunction device] manufacturers all have a unique serial number on each and every MFD.
When it notices you're copying a banknote, it prints it's own serial number on it, in a manner that you can't see without certain light conditions.
Interestingly, nowadays they sometimes just blank out the note instead. I don't know exactly what determines this [I'm not party to that information - it's kind of a secret, if you can imagine that...]
Copying notes, in and of itself, is a federal offense unless the note is changed by something like 15%. I can't remember quite how the law works, but if the printer spits out something closely resembling a valid banknote, you've commited an offense.
So when you get a new copier and test it using a banknote? BURN the piece of paper you just made. Shredding it may or may not actually decimate the serial number, since you
The US Govt has the serial number of every copier on file with who it belongs to.
Just FYI.
Re:What's next? (Score:2, Insightful)
It is not Adobe's job to enforce the law. That would be the secret service -- at least when it comes to counterfeit money. This is just plain old bullshit.
Re:The promlem? Censorship! (Score:4, Insightful)
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! (Score:3, Insightful)
How to make uncopyable images? (Score:2, Insightful)
Just imagine what would happen if someone had it tattooed on their bottom at the next Christmas party - explain that to the copier repair man...
the circle patter also encodes the issuing bank
So it looks like the Euro notes may be possibly country encoded - just not so obviously.
Re:United States of Authoritarianism (Score:1, Insightful)
*Sigh* Talk about sheep!... you're proving yourself to be one of them, following along with others in their mindless anti-Bush rhetoric. Apparently it escaped your attention that ALL OF CONGRESS but ONE PERSON voted for "George's" Patriot Act. If the Patriot Act is bad, then don't blame Bush, blame EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL in both the HOUSE and SENATE but ONE. It's bipartisan crap, not just Republican crap.
I'm no great Bush fan, but statements like that just annoy me.
Go wash your wool and stick to things you know something about, like Shepards and grazing.
D