From: AJ Barrett <abarrett@checkfree.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1662f8613f3853ad6b60106864639e73e1a0ab3094e1b58d39b7903d470c479a
Message ID: <2.2.32.19961205161828.006f1aa8@xavier>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-05 16:22:29 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:22:29 -0800 (PST)
From: AJ Barrett <abarrett@checkfree.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:22:29 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: [crypto] Avatar Protection?
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19961205161828.006f1aa8@xavier>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 09:13 PM 12/4/96 -0500, e$pam wrote:
<snip>
This sounds like a good argument for the crypto "watermark" idea that was
discussed a few times earlier on the list. I think it goes something like
this: The document/avatar/code/whatever has a crypto identifier embedded in
it that can be extracted to verify ownership. Perhaps a good analogy might
be a steganographic application.
> The problem is this: Is there a way for a user to "view" the client's
> avatar (and in this sense, the user usually has to receive a copy
> of the code to render the avatar and render it on the local machine)
> but not save a copy? Assume that a client with no save feature
> is not a viable option...too easy to work around.
Yep. Even the "eyes only" setting in PGP is no good if the recipient is
savvy enough to cut and paste the plaintext to the clipboard.
--
Sincerely,
AJ Barrett <abarrett@checkfree.com>
Product Analyst
CheckFree Corporation: The Way Money Moves
http://www.checkfree.com
Return to December 1996
Return to “AJ Barrett <abarrett@checkfree.com>”
1996-12-05 (Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:22:29 -0800 (PST)) - Re: [crypto] Avatar Protection? - AJ Barrett <abarrett@checkfree.com>