> a case where a normal person had genuine photos leaked and then just baldly denied everything "Genuine" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. A big part o

> a case where a normal person had genuine photos leaked and then just baldly denied everything "Genuine" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. A big part of the threat model for image provenance/signing/similarity diffing is identifying when images aren't genuine--if they're from elsewhere than they're claimed to be from, or have been modified. You're right that there are privacy/security costs to attributability, and that it's not always the right thing to do. I hope that keeping provenance information either entirely cryptographic in nature (okay, the image has a signature--you can't determine anything about that signature other than "signed with this key y/n" when you present a key) or reducing identifying or fingerprintable information presence in provenance metadata is sufficient to mitigate some of those concerns. Dr. Neal Krawetz has written and researched a lot about this topic: https://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/1069-The-Big-Bulleted-List.html https://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/1069-The-B... https://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/1098-Metas-Un-Stable-Signature.html https://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/1098-Metas... https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/?/archives/529-Kind-of-Like-That.html https://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/?/archives/529-Kind-of-Lik...