Jow Forums injects something into images

Maybe only done to Pepe images because Pepe is an evil alt-right symbol? Testing Wojak

Attached: 1530658287554.jpg (778x900, 65K)

>potato servers doing image recognition

Okay so the only things I get are things like this
00010120: 0014 0050 0140 0500 1400 5001 4005 0014 [email protected].@...
00010130: 0050 0140 0500 1400 5001 4005 0014 0050 [email protected][email protected]
00010140: 0140 0500 1400 5001 4005 0014 0050 0140 [email protected][email protected].@
00010150: 0500 1400 5001 4005 0014 0050 0140 0500 [email protected].@..
00010160: 1400 5001 4005 0014 0050 0140 0500 1400 [email protected].@....
so the P.E.P.E thing is probably just a coincidence

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS CHINK DOING TO MY IMAGE????

Attached: 1538023137912.png (1182x974, 81K)

testing a moderately rare pepe

Attached: 3947037+_d4cf22542c9a7d30732efd88ab8a3f50.jpg (403x604, 38K)

i would bet that its to make the uploading process much faster.
Instead of uploading a new image every time they check the image hash and if its up on their server they discard it?

schizoposter is at it again

testing

Attached: 1528529371148.jpg (234x250, 11K)

Same hashes.

Attached: 1552627052413.png (600x600, 202K)

Check, upload network activity, in same pepe imagen

look at my image

Attached: 3c62392fc3f87b1e9b4fe978273c49d8.gif (599x468, 662K)

CUTE

nani the fuck

Attached: 1538661573634.png (650x490, 20K)

G-GUYS?!!???

Attached: divine sign.png (1024x865, 661K)

Make your own!
picrew.me/image_maker/8687

Attached: 1527069586207.png (600x600, 194K)

>that console
Is that a screenshot? So fucking beautiful.

I got a good initial roll. smug

Attached: 8687_bMSntrCa.png (600x600, 127K)

so tldr of thread
>schizo uploads an image of pepe
>for some fucking reason he decides to download it and open it in a hex editor
>on a few cherry-picked lines out of several thousands the word PEPE appears
>starts thinking JPEG compression is Jow Forums injecting something to track him

Test

Attached: 1549359079033.jpg (292x268, 14K)

holy shit

Attached: 1547333250458.png (1440x900, 3.71M)

he's watching us

Attached: 1551389922051.png (480x640, 535K)

Can someone test if removing the extra tracking shit from the image restores the hash to the original? This is important.

It's just the default, you need to click the dice to roll a random one.

Attached: 1540810787877.png (600x600, 187K)

Attached: gay christian vampire.jpg (630x420, 37K)

me by the way

Attached: 8687_UUKsMeQG.png (600x600, 164K)

Sorry to tell you this but the hash literally doesn't change.

Attached: g.png (256x256, 4K)

>Sorry to tell you this
What, you mean after injecting the thing? How the fuck?

>the hash literally doesn't change
Relative to what?

Upload an image. Redownload the Jow Forums version. Check and compare hashes. They are literally unchanged.

That's definitely bullshit because I've done it before and it changed.
Testing png

Attached: 1537724193400.png (836x1463, 649K)

My Terry image is literally unchanged. Might be exclusive to png now that you mention it.

Hash unchanged.
Testing jpg

Attached: 1522556774088.jpg (714x1000, 538K)

Progressive jaypegs or jaypegs with EXIF data are converted to normal jaypegs or jaypegs with no EXIF.

Ur cute, here's me

Attached: 1547419853623.png (600x600, 179K)

Hash changed.
Original SHA1: 9afbc7efe64edc5cd55f489586f6d4dacf3c45cd
SHA1 after uploading: bf66a840861a6de207018a040d93c6076fc200c6
Fuck this shit. Fuck you hiro.

See You dumb fuck

>Progressive jaypegs or jaypegs with EXIF data are converted to normal jaypegs or jaypegs with no EXIF.
That's fucking shit. That should be fucking illegal. FUCK HIRO

. wget i.imgur.com/rulqgI0.jpg
. md5sum rulqgI0.jpg
b0fe9f93bd11b5386dc116d06d0c14ec rulqgI0.jpg

Now try posting it here. Jow Forums will tell you it is a dupe of .
. wget i.4cdn.org/g/1552702271296.jpg
. md5sum 1552702271296.jpg
b0697a1df0efd3eb707c90b83b23276e 1552702271296.jpg
. convert 1552702271296.jpg v1.pnm
. convert rulqgI0.jpg v2.pnm
. diff v1.pnm v2.pnm && echo same
same

>EXIF data should not be expunged
You fucking wot?

Very cute.
(I don't remember which site this one is from)

Attached: mes transparent 2.png (1920x1080, 210K)

You are retarded, removing exif data is a good thing

No, the hash should fucking stay the same, so no fucking touching the image in ANY way whatsoever. If the user wants to upload EXIF that's their own goddamn fucking problem. STOP FUCKING CHANGE THE HASHES YOU GODDAMN KIKE FUCK YOU

Yes, but converting progressive JPEGs to normal is not.

I don't fucking care about the exif THE HASH SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED. THE HASH MATTERS MORE THAN THE FUCKING EXIF

And why exactly would the hashes being the same matter more than expunging EXIF data?

see
Just convert it to PNM and hash that if you want a hash based exclusively on the pixels. The PNM prepresentation doesn't change.

To verify integrity of my trap hentai.

So reverse image search by md5 actually works and tag mappings work.
Especially those tag mappings, that shit is important. Changing the hash is a crime punishable by death.
Never, EVER change the hash of an image.

>removing exif data is a good thing
Should honestly be up to the users. Maybe I want people to know my GPS location. Please come over.

>Just convert it to PNM and hash that if you want a hash based exclusively on the pixels.
Yeah tell that to boorus and hydrus.

That you backup on Jow Forums?
Every big side expunges EXIF data and thus changes the MD5 hash of uploaded images.

>Every big side expunges EXIF data and thus changes the MD5 hash of uploaded images.
You think that makes it acceptable?

Hydrus doesn't use perceptual hashing?

This is why I buy a pass. Stay mad autists.

Yes. So the average retards don't dox themselves.
If you actually give a fuck about the MD5 of an image uploaded to Jow Forums you got some serious issues you should work on.
And if you need MD5 to verify integrity etc you should not upload it to something like this Mongolian karaoke discussion forum.

Do passes stop jpg hashes from changing?

I agree, but I wish there was some way to alleviate the concerns of
Maybe reverse image should work with an image identical save for no exif data? You'd have the two hashes, and users could say "these are the same". and the system recognizes it from that point onwards.
That's a lot of work though.

That being said, doing all-caps makes you seem a bit spergy.

Jow Forums pioneered it after phonefags starting inadvertently posting their GPS coordinates on /b/. Getting GPS-doxed through a phone picture became a thing almost immediately after the iPhone hit. Definitely no later than 2008.

>Yes. So the average retards don't dox themselves.
Oh yes, instead of making things better for the non retards, lets ruin it for them and favor the retards instead. Great fucking idea.
Fuck off, retards deserve to be doxxed. That is not a good reason in a million fucking years to change the hash.

Test

Attached: Unknown.jpg (225x225, 7K)

ITT: newfags, there was an old blogpost from ~2006 when this changed

Read the thread you're in. The poster you're replying to has stated a pretty good reason why he cares. That said, I think the fault lies with Hydrus and the archive. Image search should not rely on the MD5.

I've always known about it, retard. That doesn't make it acceptable.

>instead of making things better for the non retards
Like by default removing exif data so they don't need to worry about doxing themselves accidentally because they have no fucking clue what exif data is?
And if you are seriously implying the average retard knows what exif data, MD5 hashes, or image search via MD5 hashing is then you are literally beyond saving. Also image search via MD5 is and always was shit.

>~2006 when this changed
No way. It changed later. People still got EXIF-doxxed in 2007-2008.

Tagging by perceptual hash is not useful because most tag archives and all the boorus only give md5.

>2006
No it was much later

Attached: 1543236207792.png (600x600, 181K)

2009?

Oh wait I didn't bother to read properly.
Same shit though. Big companies will never give a shit about a minority of users that are literally within margin of error in terms of user percentage. And again if you are using MD5 hashing for reverse image search you should really just stop.

So you actually download the booru's contents and map the MD5 to perceptual hashes. There are torrents of *boorus' contents.

I want to say between 2010 and 2012

I don't remember but I'm pretty sure it was even later. I remember people getting pizza'd past 2010.

Fucking actually read my post you idiot, I never implied any of that.
>Like by default removing exif data so they don't need to worry about doxing themselves accidentally because they have no fucking clue what exif data is?
And I'm saying it's not worth saving these retards if the cost is the change the hash. That's far too big of a cost.
They're retards, they deserve whatever happens to them, I shouldn't have to explain this to you. Retards get zero precedence.
Hashes matter to people who need their hashes to match the hash on the booru and to match the hash that the tag mappings for that image use. Change the hash and suddenly all those tags for that image are fucking gone. You're saying I should lose my tags because dumbfucks might dox themselves.
Are you seriously arguing in their favor? Fuck them.

That's really fucking horrible, slow, and shit.
Idiotic idea.

Honestly user. The only real retard I am seeing here is you using MD5 for reverse image search and tagging.

test

Attached: 1539742950578.jpg (261x163, 6K)

More idiotic than relying on an image's MD5 never changing?

he's retarded, don't respond to passfags

If I was in charge, it'd be SHA256.
I don't have any control over which hash algorithm is used retard, and honestly it doesn't matter.
NONE of the hashes should change. Not the MD5, SHA1, SHA256, SHA512. NONE OF THEM SHOULD FUCKING CHANGE. Ever.
Hashes are the most efficient thing to map tags to.

Nothing's getting injected, filesize hasn't changed.

Yes. Way more idiotic.
I told you before, perceptual hashes are not useful.

Do NOT bully me for having OCD

>Relying on a files hash (whatever algorithm) never changing ever in the history of ever when uploading it to random websites security concerns be damned is the most efficient thing ever

Reread what I said
>Hashes are the most efficient thing to map tags to.
This is wildly different to the pile of shit you just spewed out of your ass.
Suggest a better way to do tag mappings or fuck off.

>If I was in charge, it'd be SHA256.
I chuckled IRL. That would be SO much better, user. Totally an improvement. The NSA would not be able to replace your Daiyousei porn pics with spoofs.

testing again with apu

Attached: aa.png (186x170, 3K)

what the fuck is this, looks great. Like a hardware terminal, but what is that font?
Normally those colors look wannabe hacker but here it's somewhat nice in the eyes, maybe because I have redshift on

>Botnetshift

Test

Attached: RIP.png (551x371, 193K)