Leica M11-P: New Flagship With Content Authentication

[Stef63]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

24 minutes ago, steveBK said:

It does work remarkably well given that the density of apple devices in any inhabited area is quite high
This is why using it to track luggage works fairly well - can gain some confidence that checked bags make it through transit and onto connecting flight, when its going to pop onto luggage carousel, etc 

I think another generation or two of shrinking the size of them and they'll have even more use cases
I can already fit one in all my bags, house/car keychains and in my wallet
You could already now probably hide one in the cushioning of a camera strap if one was creative enough.. 

Additionally, most of the volume of an AirTag is taken up by its casing and battery. This wouldn't be necessary, as only the electronics need to be integrated into the M.

[MattMaber]

5 hours ago, rramesh said:

Don’t understand the real value of content authentication in camera. It can always be done in post. 

That was my thoughts, from what Ive seen its easily removed or edited and if you do edit the file in s/w which doesnt support the CA standard presumably it wont even show the changes.

Not sure I see the point unless there something else 'magical' going on here.

Happy to be proven wrong 

[hepcat]

17 hours ago, Chuck Albertson said:

I don't recall that coming up in court. I don't know the rules in your jurisdiction, but over here to authenticate an image in court (film or digital), all you need is a warm body on the witness stand testifying that it's an accurate depiction of the scene they witnessed.

I supervised a crime scene unit in NoCal from 1991-1997.  There was a continuing discussion for several years about what the courts might do in regard to accepting digital imaging as evidence as a result of the ability of photographers to manipulate the photos.   But you're absolutely correct that in the end, it's a print that's submitted and the authentication is done by a warm body testifying under oath that the image is a "true and accurate representation of the scene as they saw it."   It once again comes down to a human being truthful.  Or a human lying under penalty of perjury.   Just as it always has.   The original capture medium is irrelevant.

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, haikos said:

Air Tag only works if another Apple device passes in its vicinity and pings it. It's not a realtime GPS unless its owner is on the app and can connect to it.
Plus, the air tag is not so tiny, relatively speaking.

That’s not how it works. Airtags automatically fetch and constantly update their location from any nearby iOS device, of which there are billions in the world. They work remarkably well. 
as someone else mentioned, most of the size is because of the button style battery and casing. The actual chip is quite small and would easily fit into a camera (except perhaps the M since space is constrained) or a case. 
Even the Airpods, which are as big as a Leica M battery, have the Find My chip. 
I suspect the only problem is licensing 

[Anbaric]

36 minutes ago, MattMaber said:

That was my thoughts, from what Ive seen its easily removed or edited and if you do edit the file in s/w which doesnt support the CA standard presumably it wont even show the changes.

Not sure I see the point unless there something else 'magical' going on here.

Happy to be proven wrong 

The authentication is easily removed, but then you no longer have an authenticated image. If you attempt to edit the authentication metadata, or edit the image in software that doesn't support authentication, then again you won't have an authenticated image. I assume (and I think post #107 confirms) that a cryptographic hash of the image data is generated on capture, and after each edit in software that supports authentication. If you change the image data with something else, it will no longer match the current hash and the authentication software will detect this.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Anbaric

[MattMaber]

Exactly, and at that point its no better than an image captured by a camera without CA.

Hence Im not sure I see the point.

Unless of course CA images becomes mandatory in press (unlikely)

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

36 minutes ago, MattMaber said:

That was my thoughts, from what Ive seen its easily removed or edited and if you do edit the file in s/w which doesnt support the CA standard presumably it wont even show the changes.

Not sure I see the point unless there something else 'magical' going on here.

Happy to be proven wrong 

Not so sure about these comments as it was designed to be added to the file with no tampering thereafter even by the owner of the image. Nothing like it can be added afterwards since that is the security in that no one can change the file as rendered once the protection is in place.

[Simone_DF]

3 minutes ago, MattMaber said:

Exactly, and at that point its no better than an image captured by a camera without CA.

Hence Im not sure I see the point.

Unless of course CA images becomes mandatory in press (unlikely)

Ok. Imagine this scene. There are 2 photojournalists and a controversial event is in front of them. Both capture the same scene. One has CA disabled, the other one enabled all the way through the final image.  
You, as a news editor, which image would you buy, one of which you can prove authenticity or the other one?

[MattMaber]

6 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Ok. Imagine this scene. There are 2 photojournalists and a controversial event is in front of them. Both capture the same scene. One has CA disabled, the other one enabled all the way through the final image.  
You, as a news editor, which image would you buy, one of which you can prove authenticity or the other one?

Cheapest probably  😕 that's quite the journalism utopia you envision 😁

I understand the pint your making but it will need to become an industry standard too actually be relevant 

Again, happy to be proven wrong 

[Anbaric]

4 minutes ago, MattMaber said:

Exactly, and at that point its no better than an image captured by a camera without CA.

Hence Im not sure I see the point.

Unless of course CA images becomes mandatory in press (unlikely)

The point is, if you are a photographer who cares about authentication of capture and documented edits, or your employer/client does, here is a mechanism for providing it, all the way from the camera via the editor to (potentially) upload to a compliant image sharing platform. Nobody would care about this if just Leica did it, but if it becomes mainstream in cameras and image editing software, it may well become a standard. Adobe, Microsoft, Canon, Nikon, Sony, the BBC and Reuters have all been involved in this at some level (defining the standard or taking part in pilots, etc.). At least one trial with Canon and Reuters included GPS tags and timestamps, so it would be possible to authenticate where and when an image was captured, and document all subsequent edits.

[MattMaber]

1 minute ago, Anbaric said:

The point is, if you are a photographer who cares about authentication of capture and documented edits, or your employer/client does, here is a mechanism for providing it, all the way from the camera via the editor to (potentially) upload to a compliant image sharing platform. Nobody would care about this if just Leica did it, but if it becomes mainstream in cameras and image editing software, it may well become a standard. Adobe, Microsoft, Canon, Nikon, Sony, the BBC and Reuters have all been involved in this at some level (defining the standard or taking part in pilots, etc.). At least one trial with Canon and Reuters included GPS tags and timestamps, so it would be possible to authenticate where and when an image was captured, and document all subsequent edits.

I sincerely hope it will become widely used and industry standard, but have you seen the quality of photogrpahy and journalism lately?

its all smart phone vids and social journalism.

[Anbaric]

16 minutes ago, algrove said:

Not so sure about these comments as it was designed to be added to the file with no tampering thereafter even by the owner of the image. Nothing like it can be added afterwards since that is the security in that no one can change the file as rendered once the protection is in place.

The system, if fully implemented, can handle the original capture and later (documented) edits with compliant software. So if (say) a news organisation allowed you to only make minor corrections like rotation, slight cropping and minor colour/contrast adjustments, you could prove you had only done that and not (say) added or removed a major picture element.

[algrove]

Anabric

The problem is it has not been "fully implemented" for 20 years. Many big names have never supported it including Apple, Google and software wise C1 does not support this. PhotoMechanic used by many pros does not mention its support for this feature either.

 

Theories are nice, but must become factual for it to matter. I applaud Leica for this move, but it is one small step for mankind to quote an often used phrase.

[Anbaric]

1 minute ago, MattMaber said:

I sincerely hope it will become widely used and industry standard, but have you seen the quality of photogrpahy and journalism lately?

its all smart phone vids and social journalism.

If this catches on I would bet it gets added to smartphones, which of course already have GPS and biometrics, so you could in principle show it was you who unlocked the phone 5 seconds before the image was captured at the depicted event. It won't make that crappy phone footage any better though! In 'authenticated journalism' mode, the camera should refuse to operate unless the phone is rotated into landscape orientation. 🙂

[Simone_DF]

19 minutes ago, MattMaber said:

Cheapest probably  😕 that's quite the journalism utopia you envision 😁

I understand the pint your making but it will need to become an industry standard too actually be relevant 

Again, happy to be proven wrong 

Oh, but I totally agree with you. I just wanted to illustrate potential use (emphasis on potential!) of this technology. 

[MattMaber]

Just now, Simone_DF said:

Oh, but I totally agree with you. I just wanted to illustrate potential use (emphasis on potential!) of this technology. 

theres no reason surely they cant create the unique code hasn't an encrypted hash from the serial no, wifi Mac or some other unique data and   create that on camera.

The chip seems a bit of marketing MacGuffin tbh

[Anbaric]

6 minutes ago, algrove said:

The problem is it has not been "fully implemented" for 20 years. Many big names have never supported it including Apple, Google and software wise C1 does not support this. PhotoMechanic used by many pros does not mention its support for this feature either.

There have been ideas like this before, but this time there seems to be a bit more momentum behind them, driven by Adobe and others, with some consolidation of the various camps. I think AI-generated fakes are giving the imaging industries pause for thought, and there are now open technical standards anyone can adopt:

https://news.adobe.com/news/news-details/2022/Adobe-Partners-With-Leica-and-Nikon-To-Implement-Content-Authenticity-Technology-Into-Cameras/default.aspx

https://www.canon.co.uk/press-centre/press-releases/2023/08/reuters-new-proof-of-concept-employs-authentication-system/

https://c2pa.org/

Will this become a universal standard, or will it go the way of DNG as something only Adobe and a couple of camera makers take seriously? We'll have to wait and see. But I think something like this is needed in an age when media are so easily faked, sometimes with major social and political consequences.

[Simone_DF]

Just now, MattMaber said:

theres no reason surely they cant create the unique code hasn't an encrypted hash from the serial no, wifi Mac or some other unique data and   create that on camera.

The chip seems a bit of marketing MacGuffin tbh

Not really. The secure enclave adds an extra strong layer of security. 
Apple has done something somewhat similar with Apple Pay. Your card data is stored on a separate on-device chip, and communicate to the external world only via a secure hash, which in turn is sent to Apple servers to be decrypted, authenticated then encrypted again to be sent to the receiver end (the merchant)  

[MattMaber]

lol I guess I value my Apple Pay transactions higher. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[FrozenInTime]

This story illustrates that no amount of authentication associated with the captured image file and processing chain will in itself ensure journalistic integrity.

https://petapixel.com/2023/10/25/picture-that-won-worlds-largest-photo-competition-was-staged/