TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Hash matching proposals for the Online Safety Act's implementation are dangerous

53 点作者 olestr超过 1 年前

4 条评论

jjgreen超过 1 年前
Not just false positives. You won't get the original images with the hashes of course, so no problem for a hostile state to slip in a few hashes of other things it doesn't like: document on off-colour politics, criticism of the prime-minister, ...
demondemidi超过 1 年前
There’s no such thing as “similar enough” with a hash. One bit change in the source imagine creates as large a Hamming distance as possible in the hash bits - that’s literally the point. Unless I’m missing something that seems ludicrous to consider a hash as close enough to be a reason for probably cause.
评论 #38219619 未加载
评论 #38218980 未加载
hiAndrewQuinn超过 1 年前
This reminds me that I should really publish that blog post about using hashes to send documents &quot;into the future&quot; (really just to prove you wrote them at an earlier date) at some point.<p>&gt;Hash matching, or hash scanning, compares certain pieces of content such as videos, pictures or text, to a database of illegal content. It is done by turning the content into “hashes”, a sample of the content a bit like a fingerprint. The hashes of content stored or shared by a specific user are then compared to the hashes of known illegal content in a database and result in a match if the software deems that the hashes are identical or similar enough.<p>Because one of the things I realized while writing it is that there&#x27;s an interesting contrapositive to keeping your own public list of hashes online somewhere:<p>1. By putting a hash on your public hash list, you are making a claim that you have access to a particular document at a particular time.<p>2. If someone else posts a hash on your hash list, say to a well-known document like the HTML source of example.com, they have in effect proven that you are not the <i>sole person</i> who can edit that hash list, and<p>3. Therefore your claim to access of <i>anything</i> on that hash list is repudiable and hence the entire list must be thrown out.<p>So... Maybe there&#x27;s a similar counterjamming method available here? E.g. stuff the hash of &quot;Hello world&quot; into one of these illegal databases, then show it&#x27;s there, to call into question the idea that everything on these databases is illegal and thereby get them thrown out of court.<p>(P.S., I&#x27;m almost positive you can use keypair encryption to get around this, but I haven&#x27;t taken a bus ride long enough to puzzle out the details of how yet.)
评论 #38219725 未加载
olestr超过 1 年前
The example they provide for false positives is haunting