The world’s leading expert in identifying deepfakes has a big problem. No longer able to identify them

Is called Hany Farid and is considered one of the world’s leading experts on deepfake videos. This digital forensics expert was capable of uncovering videos manipulated by governments, for example, but now he has decided to leave Silicon Valley for one simple reason: It is no longer able to differentiate the real ones from those that are being generated with AI tools. And we are not surprised. Deepfakes indistinguishable from reality. In the last two decades Farid, 60, has specialized in identifying fake videos. This professor at the University of California at Berkeley has confessed that advances in generative AI have made traditional detection methods are no longer of any use. Their conclusions confirm the feeling that we have had for a long time with this type of content: AI has advanced so much that the problem is no longer just deepfakes: it is that we distrust even real photos. Farid’s reputation precedes him. His father worked for 50 years as a chemist at Eastman Kodak, and Farid grew up visiting the dark room often, watching photos become photos as they passed through the different liquids. He ended up designing a “digital fingerprint” system that made it possible to detect cases of child pornography hidden on the Internet. In fact, its technology has led to 30 million cases of potential abuse being reported each year, as well as leading to hundreds of arrests and several rescues. I surrender. Faced with the avalanche of perfect deepfakes generated with AI, Farid has decided to leave his job to take refuge on a farm in Vermont. His surrender is the latest demonstration of a harsh reality: We can no longer trust what we see on networks. Now he is dedicated to working with wood, and has distanced himself from networks and technology. The missile that changed everything. The turning point that demonstrates this crisis of this digital forensic task occurred after the viral spread of a video showing the alleged impact of a US missile on a school in Iran. Farid spent an entire day breaking down the sequence frame by frame: analyzing the geometry of the shadows, the sound delay rate of the explosion according to the laws of physics, or the pixel length of the projectile. Impossible to decide if it is false or not. He found nothing that could prove that the video was fake, and the same thing happened to other specialists. None could issue a clear verdict of authenticity, and that made it clear that AI video generation is currently so advanced that real content is indistinguishable from a deepfake generated with these latest generation models. Verifying is too complicated. There is another problem here: generating a fake video, whether toxic or not, with cloned voices that are perfectly synchronized with the interlocutor is easy, fast and cheap. Carrying out a forensic investigation to try to detect whether the video is real or not takes hours of computational and direct analysis by specialists. Given that deepfakes manage to go viral in just 20 minutes if they are successful, the methods to contain this spread are useless for a simple reason: they arrive late. The biter bit. The researcher himself was a victim of this reality: cybercriminals cloned his phone number and used AI to generate his voice and thus impersonate his identity. With that clone, they called a close contact who was involved in a court case and managed to extract confidential information. Farid and his wife, a vision researcher at Berkeley, they had to create a secret safe word at the beginning of each family call to certify that each interlocutor was who they said they were. The situation generates a disturbing paranoia and mistrust. “I’m going blind”. In the report of The New York TimesFarid explained that his studies show that most people can no longer differentiate a real photo from a digitally created one. “I feel like I’m going blind,” he indicated, showing his concern about an AI that is managing to obscure the truth and distort reality. Watermarks as a solution. Faced with this avalanche of images and videos generated by AI that are indistinguishable from reality, one of the potential ways to mitigate the problem continues to gain strength. It is, of course, the watermarkstotally invisible and which are part of the metadata of those files. Two promising initiatives. There are several initiatives in this regard, although the most notable It is that of the C2PA coalition which includes, for example, Google and OpenAI. AI tools should add those watermarks identifying those contents (“This video has been generated with this AI application, this image has been generated or edited with this other one”), but at the moment that type of option is not applied by default. Another important project in this sense is SynthIDGoogle’s technology to “mark” these contents as created with AI. Image | Bild (CC0) In Xataka | What happened to Technicolor: evolution and death of the company that changed cinema and was overwhelmed by its ambition

A simple router is a machine capable of identifying humans with almost 100% accuracy. Or so these researchers say

Using WiFi networks as a technology to track people is a twist in the script that not all of us saw coming. He Karlsruher Institute for Technologyone of the strongest research institutions in Germany, assures close to 100% accuracy when recognizing people without any type of camera and using it. What exactly happened. The KIT (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) team published a paper with a promising headline: “Ordinary WiFi can identify people with almost perfect accuracy”. And this is achieved thanks to something that routers have been doing for recent years: beamforming feedback information. How the hell does this work?. To understand what it is about beamforming You must first understand how the devices emit signals. routers. In their first generations, routers emitted in all directions, just like a light bulb emits light in that way. With the most modern versions of WiFi, the way the signal is transmitted has improved. Routers began to concentrate the signal towards where the receiving device is, like a flashlight instead of a light bulb. Beanformig. That is called beamformingto form a concentrated beam and received by another device. But to aim well, the router needs to know where to point, and it is the connected devices themselves—your cell phone, your laptop—that send that information to the router continuously. Basically, they are constantly telling the router “hey, I’m here.” That message is the BFI, beamforming feedback information. And what is this for?. Now you know that your router sends information to your gadgets and that your gadgets send information to the router. When the devices send information to the router, they describe how the signal arrives, and interference along the way is recorded. Among them, human beings. Our body partially absorbs WiFi waves, reflects them, deflects them and alters how they reach the mobile phone or router. The researchers used that signal data to train models of artificial intelligencein order to detect patterns that would allow humans to be detected. They fed the system with thousands of examples associated with different people until the model learned to detect those wave changes associated with human presence. The system is not capable of visually recognizing anything in the environment, but it manages to have information about when a human is present in the environment. The caution. According to the researchers, “this technology turns each router into a potential means of surveillance.” “If you regularly pass by a café that operates a WiFi network, you could be identified there without realizing it and be recognized later, for example, by public authorities or companies.” The reality? It would be necessary for cybercriminals to develop a system identical or similar to that of the KIT to achieve a human video surveillance system through WiFi signals. The nuance. Under laboratory conditions, with 197 participants and in controlled environments, the system was close to 100% accuracy. But in the real world, it would be necessary to train a new model with data from hundreds of people in different spaces. The model is not a ready-to-deploy technology or a real threat – nor is it intended to be applied – but the research reveals how simple a priori data sets can be trained as a surveillance tool. In Xataka | There is a booming job in the era of artificial intelligence: cybersecurity expert

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.