(untitled)

Well, with the most recent rejection from CCS and the multiple years spent on this project, my deredaction paper is dead. I'll put it on arxiv or something later but for now if people are interested in the fact redaction is broken, you can read details here. Reviewers claimed that it wasn't really a threat, and I don't have time to work on it any more, so the public space is fine. https://github.com/maxwell-bland/deredaction-paper/blob/main/paper.06.05.pdf They must be right. Oh well. Do people feel like this is promising at all given our current results? Thoughts? Anyways, thank you to lainchan for being the main support for me these past few years. I would've hung myself if not for this site. Regards.

very interesting project lainon, i wouldnt undersell it unless I was one hiding info in papers.

>>19438 This is pretty cool, op. Bummer this was rejected; it was a really fun read. In any case, well done, this is pretty thorough.

>>19440 do u think theres a secret organization that is behind this, making sure mr demeere doesnt get more publicity and confidence okarin

>>19438 Upload it here next time. >In the past redaction involved the use of black or white markers or paper cut-outs to obscure content on physical paper. Today many redactions take place on digital PDF documents and redaction is often performed by software tools. Typical redaction tools remove text from PDF documents and draw a black or white rectangle in its place, mimicking a physical redaction. This practice is thought to be secure when the redacted text is removed and cannot be “copy-pasted” from the PDF document. We find this common conception is false—existing PDF redactions can be broken by precise measurements of non-redacted character positioning information. This is neat. >I would've hung myself if not for this site. I would've hanged myself if not for this site. It's in the nature of novel work to be ignored. I remember being so scared that someone would take an idea I had outlined and beat me to implementation, but it has been years since I implemented it and still no one cares. I continue regardless.

sounds neat, I'll give it a look in a bit. Thanks lain!

OP, do you have a djvu copy? Opening PDF documents is bad for my thyroid.

>>19444 Attached. Setting the OP repo to private for now in case I decide to polish and add results for a re-submission circa 2023, if that day ever comes. Deepweb preprint.

>>19438 >>19438 How did people think this isn't a threat, this is literally the thing that spooks try to keep hidden and have some of their brightest minds working on.

Reviewers are retarded. This is a great paper OP.

>>19447 Repo is public again for now. It has the original redacted submission. This is the reason for the typos in the "case studies" section of the version posted here and to Arxiv. The IEEE or ACM submissions do not contain these typos, since I rushed out this version. Thanks for the support lainons.