laudecum (u/laudecum)

Dead Comment

laudecum commented on These 299 macOS apps are so buggy, Apple had to fix them in AppKit (2018) worthdoingbadly.com/appki... · Posted by u/curling_grad

laudecum · 3 years ago

I’m kinda confused.

1. Some apps are open source, why not just send a PR?

2. Most apps are actively developed, why not just send a report?

I’d understand this 20 years ago when updates weren’t frequent, or if software was rarely updated. But patching Firefox in your OS feels completely unnecessary.

laudecum commented on A self-updating list of the most current useragents useragents.me... · Posted by u/stayml

TheBrokenRail · 3 years ago

Can we please just freeze the user-agent string all browsers use? (I'd prefer if we could remove it, but we all know that isn't ever happening due to all the old websites.) It's silly that it's almost 2023 and web browsers are still sending legacy-infested nonsense like "(KHTML, like Gecko)" and websites actually change behavior based on it! We have proper APIs for feature detection nowadays, websites shouldn't need to change behavior based on the browser anymore.

laudecum · 3 years ago

That’s weird. Didn’t Chrome plan to freeze that already years ago? Did they walk back?

laudecum commented on Unredacter: Never use pixelation as a redaction technique github.com/BishopFox/unre... · Posted by u/linker3000

thrdbndndn · 3 years ago

That's not how it works. it is "on top" of the previous, sure, but the same way as if I add 8 to 2 and give you 10, you can't possibly get the original number is 2.

laudecum · 3 years ago

This is it.

Let’s say you’re covering a red pixel with a black pixel. There’s no way that red pixel will in any way “survive JPEG compression” because the compression happens on the raw pixel data; the raw pixel data no longer has a red pixel.

laudecum commented on Unredacter: Never use pixelation as a redaction technique github.com/BishopFox/unre... · Posted by u/linker3000

Const-me · 3 years ago

JPEG format normally compresses pictures in 8x8 blocks, and these blocks are aligned so the first one starts at top-left corner of the image. I think these leaks you’re talking about are limited to the inside of the 8x8 blocks.

So, if you want to redact a rectangle between pixels [ 12, 4 ] – [ 34, 18 ], redact [ 8, 0 ] – [ 40, 24 ] instead, this way the black rectangle will cover complete blocks.

laudecum · 3 years ago

I don’t think what you’re saying makes sense. If you covered all information, no information is left. The blocks are irrelevant since 100% of the information is gone. There’s no “history leak” in JPEG, which is basically what’s being asked.

The only issue I see is meta tags and embedded thumbnails, which some cameras do. Stripping EXIF is always required.

Dead Comment

u/laudecum

KarmaCake day-8December 17, 2022View Original