News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Making Visible Watermarks More Effective by Retric on Thursday August 17, 2017 @06:20PM (#15041594)
Supose you have 4 points on a box. If you randomly increase or decrease the location of each point by some random value say +-3% then averaged 100,000 of those boxes, you get a smaller box(1) surrounded by a larger increasingly blurry box. This is true even if no single picture shows that single smaller box, but it will show up on the average.

(1) Rather than a true box the midpoints are going to be slightly buldging, but with a large sample set it's very close to a box.

Sure, you can get into cat and mouse games ever stranger geometry. But, the water mark is limited by how much it distracts from the image.

Re:Making Visible Watermarks More Effective by pps43 on Thursday August 17, 2017 @08:55PM (#15042543)
The article shows the result of this approach, and it clearly does not work well.
Re:Making Visible Watermarks More Effective by Retric on Friday August 18, 2017 @08:07AM (#15045394)
As I said you need a new step: "Estimating that transformation for a specific image should be fairly straightforward".

It does show a good average and simply moving the watermark was easily reversible suggesting detection of a watermark in an image was easy.