Uploading a JustForFans siterip
-
Hi, I wanted to know if justforfans marks their videos with some kind of sign with your ID
I don't really know if this is the appropiate place to post this, but I haven't found anything on the internet and I want to seed something that I personally downloaded without getting caught.Sorry for my english or phrasing, it isn't my first language
-
Regardless of the sites ...
They have their own unique digital/invisible watermarking tools,
to trace back what content you downloaded from them ...
By means of file sharing ...
Rest assured that you are responsible when joining, the site terms and condition ... -
@NeroBlack I tried to research that and came up with nothing. Why would they bother?
-
Can anyone explicitly cite three or four porn sites which have implemented individual watermark tools for their videos?
f.e. The first interested in such a feature with the technology and the means (cash) to do it would be onlyfans...
maybe nextdoor or randyblue or any other big portal?
Probably english or german sites more concerned of these features? I only recall EL/FYM watermarking (visually) their pictures. -
@kco The "watermarking" is not necessarily visible. Check out Xvid AutoGraph technology. Several sites are reported to use this.
-
@kco this kind of watermarking is not visible, some sites might add a visual indicator, RawFuckClub does this for instance. But all the big ones have watermark, onlyfans, JFF, MEN, RFC, BelamiOnline, etc.
-
@NeroBlack said in Uploading a JustForFans siterip:
Hi, I wanted to know if justforfans marks their videos with some kind of sign with your ID
I don't really know if this is the appropiate place to post this, but I haven't found anything on the internet and I want to seed something that I personally downloaded without getting caught.Sorry for my english or phrasing, it isn't my first language
Ok, I wasn't clear enough.
lololulu19 is concerned about if his copy of the files have a watermark system, perceivable or not perceivable, which is UNIQUE for his user in that site.
i.e. each user of that site (when download a video) have a unique watermark that correlates the downloade files with their account.
Thus, if those files are uploaded or shared, the site may track down its origin up to his and only his account.The purpose is not to simply claim the ownership of the video, but to track down the user.
My question is, can you mention a porn site (or more) where two users (I presume must be not only registered, but paid subscriptions) donwload a copy of a file (image or video or audio) and each user obtain a different file personally watermaked file***?
footnote:
To be clear also, I'm not talking on the site logo, text string visible on a corner, or exif information, silly watermark for copyright claims.
logo and text requires a reencoding for each user. hmmm "possible" solution (kind of weird, like the Englishlads one).
exif information can be removed without video manipulation so its a poor system, the most silly one. There are tens of programs made to right click a file and remove exif.Any other hidden strings or data distributed in the container can be removed by simply changing the container of the multimedia streams. Open avidemux, load a video, save an mp4 to mkv without reencoding, done. silly.
*** So only intra video or audio encoded techniques are left, something which is performed in the encoding time. And that is what I was talking about. I'm talking about most modern comercial watermark systems which require a manipulation in the time, color or frequency domain during encoding.
-
@kco yeah I get what you mean. I did a little digging and found the following that I think speaks of the techniques you're talking about:
Spread Spectrum Watermarking: This method spreads the watermark across the video's frequency spectrum. It's less likely to be removed without degrading the quality of the original video - probably the most robust approach and hardest to thwart.
Transform Domain Watermarking: Things like like Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT), Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT), and Singular Value Decomposition (SVD). These methods transform the video into a different domain to embed the watermark, which makes it harder for people to find and remove the watermark.
Quantization Index Modulation (QIM) Watermarking: This changes certain parts of the video data just a little bit to hide the watermark. Not as robust as the above but still hard to remove.
Perceptual Watermarking: This method uses the human perceptual system's characteristics to embed the watermark in perceptually significant components of the video, making it harder to remove without noticeably degrading the video quality. Not too difficult to thwart.
Least Significant Bit (LSB) Watermarking: This is subtle and doesn't affect the video quality much, but if someone slightly changes the video then more than likely it also spoiled the watermark.
-
@kco said in Uploading a JustForFans siterip:
My question is, can you mention a porn site (or more) where two users (I presume must be not only registered, but paid subscriptions) donwload a copy of a file (image or video or audio) and each user obtain a different file personally watermaked file***?
asking for a friend?
-
Well i guess the question is, is the watermark destroyed be re-encoding?
So i download a 1080p 50Hz .avi video and convert it to 720p 25Hz .mp4.
Or just re-encode to 25Hz with some filters. -
@PrototypA5 For the commonly used Xvid AutoGraph technology, the answer is no. Re-encoding preserves the watermark.
https://anonym.to/?https://autograph.xvid.com/ -
@tnar well and screen capturing?
-
@PrototypA5 it's literally an image being hardcoded uppon the original video in either random frames or all frames altogether. It's invisible to the eye, which means that even transcoding it to a different resolution or dropping frames wouldn't get rid of it. It sounds like science fiction but it's basically a QR code but instead of being black it blends into the video colors with very subtle alterations that can only be spotted by the people who designed it, because they know what they're looking for and we don't.
-
@PrototypA5 Yes, that too.
See @ianfontinell's
analogy.Also, keep in mind that this technology has been around for a few years now. People have been trying to defeat it using more sophisticated methods than have been mentioned here, more sophisticated methods than the ones that worked for earlier technologies. So far, there's no practical way to defeat it.
-
I know the techniques, whats underneath and their requirements. Thats why I doubt any porn site can afford such features.
Nevertheless, no one mentioned a single a site with such feature. After so many replies no one has.
Part of my point is:
If you had a site with such feature wouldn't you let your customers know? "don't try it, we can track you down"
Keep it secret it only increase the costs, because DCMA lets you take down distribution easily (and its cheap) without such techniques. If you do it its because you want to go up to courts in most cases, which are expensive (if you can reach the user) legal costs are bigger than the benefits in mosts sites.In the technical point of view my concerns are:
-
per user video reencoding requires a very expensive and complex infrastructure (economy of scale): you need to either: A) have a pool of encoded videos and associated with an user ID or B) real-time (or faster) reencode video for each user. Video is SOFTWARE ENCODED so its cpu bound.
If a user can download a video, be sure that the video was previously encoded unless the download speed its at the encoding phase. Do you understand the storage implications and costs?
If a user can't download a video (drm), speed is limited to real time, well maybe they have enough cpu power to encode all their userbase on real time, try to encode a 1440p video at 30fps with good old x264. But then videos come from "video capture" (software or hdmi) source, is that the case for justforfans?
AFAIK neither AMD or NVIDIA (I don't know about quicksync) hardware encoding apis allow such interference (addition in the workflow) for the protections mentioned (and others). Maybe in their "uber" expensive hardware encoders, I don't know.
It that case we have to evaluate the benefits/costs per "second" encoded/dowloaded/userpayment. It may be profitable, I can't tell. -
since the possibility of AI in the reencoding* process, most of those techniques vanish on the video "reconstruction".
(thats where the battle is right now).
I don't want to go any further, still looking for some sites.
-
-
@kco The technical things you say are all true.
I advise you to use the absence of a list as evidence that there is no practical tracking technology at your own risk.
Other torrent sites have lists of sites known to use the Xvid Autograph technology; maybe you want to look there, if you insist on a list. The management here doesn't post lists of this kind, so I'm loath to do so myself. -
From what i've gathered online, JFF only uses it on big creators, not all models there can have that feature, as re encoding videos for each subscribed user takes a tremendous amount of server resources
Check out this thread from JFF themselves https://twitter.com/justforfanssite/status/1234619363338203138
-
@wewe1221 can't visit the site
I'm not member of that tracker.
