EFF Requests Help to Identify "Evil" Printers

jason writes "In preparation for a possible legal challenge, The Electronic Frontiers Foundation is requesting your help in identifying which printers are embedding traceable information in the documents they produce. Printer manufactures added this technology under persuasion from the government inorder to help combat counterfeiting operations, however this technology defeats the presumed anonymity most people expect from the documents they print."

Tinfoil printouts

[banglogic (702448)]

From TFA:

The millimeter-sized dots appear about every inch on a page, nestled within the printed words and margins.

Can anyone produce a human-readable example of this?
Perhaps it's time to unfold my tinfoil hat and use it to cover my printouts instead.

Re:Tinfoil printouts

[billdar (595311)]

Our xerox does this... I just followed the instructions in TFA:

The dots' minuscule size, covering less than one-thousandth of the page, along with their color combination of yellow on white, makes them invisible to the naked eye, Crean says. One way to determine if your color laser is applying this tracking process is to shine a blue LED light--say, from a keychain laser flashlight--on your page and use a magnifier.

Scary stuff

[einhverfr (238914)]

The thought that immediately comes to mind is that the USSR used to catalog the typefaces of every typewriter sold so that they could trace any document back to the original author.

Of course, I suspect that any sufficiently advanced forensic analysis of a document could probably tie it to a printer. However, the fact that these are documented is what bothers me. I.e. the FBI need only ask Xerox which printer produced a specific document and they can tell them.

The USSR used this sort of scheme to censor writers and ensure that if someone spoke out they could be easily traced. What is to prevent any government from making the same requirements of any company?

Re:Tinfoil printouts

[orthogonal (588627)]

According the EFF, for Xerox( but not Canon) printers, it looks like this:

For Xerox documents, within the 0.5" by 1" rectangular space, 8 x 15 = 120 locations exist for printers to print yellow tracking dots. Consider the following pattern found on test00-template, printed on a Xerox DocuColor 12 located at FedEx Kinko's, 201 Sacramento Street, San Francisco, CA.

(The Slashdot "lameness" filter prevents me from posting the entire diagram.)

Now it seems to me that Open Source has an answer for this. Can we patch Xerox printer drivers so that they automatically print the yellow dot at all 120 locations, making each page bear a fake serial number of "FF FF FF ..."?

Or if the drivers aren't open source, can we write proxy printer drivers that add the dots and then forward to the real Xerox print driver?

Who'll take on this challenge? (Preferably a good linux coder who isn't a US citizen or resident.)

I work for a manufacturer

[YttriumOxide (837412)]

I work for a large printer/copier manufacturer in the technical services area (IT related) and can confirm we've been doing this for MANY years in our colour products.

We refer to the technology as "micro dots". Each dot can uniquely identify the device by it's serial number (which is not only printed on a label but also hardcoded in to the machine).

I also happen to live in Australia, where it'd be a cold day in hell before we told anyone who didn't have a court order the serial number of a printer that produced a page or who we sold it to.

The dots are MUCH smaller than 1mm as suggested here, however I can confirm that yellow toner is used. If you have a good magnifying glass (at least 8 times) and a sharp eye you can spot them, but it's really not easy.

Additionally, our machines all have anti-counterfeit technology anyway. If you try to print or copy a banknote from any major world currency, all you'll get is a black square and possibly an error code being displayed on the panel.

In the entire time I've worked for this company, we've never once had to do a micro dot check for the police/government/whatever - I'd know because there's only about 3 or 4 of us in the company that have the knowhow to do it and they all work in my department. (no, the govt doesn't know how to do it themselves and even if they did, they'd still need to ask us where that serial number is now).

I've deliberately avoided mentioning my employers name in this post. I'm pretty sure I haven't broken any confidentiality agreements with this post (all I'm doing is confirming, not supplying new info) but you can't be too careful. Suffice to say, I don't think it matters which major manufacturer, I'd bet my bottom dollar we all do it.

Yeah, I can see it.

[troon (724114)]

Each dot can uniquely identify the device by it's serial number

I can see the extra dot added, between the "t" and "s" of "its".

I thought they were meant to be yellow?

Conspiracy theory for the day

[Anonymous Brave Guy (457657)]

OK, so let me be sure I understand this.

You're telling me that your printers always include a dot, printed with yellow toner, visible only with an 8x magnifying glass, in which is encoded enough information for you to identify exactly which printer that you made was responsible for printing that page?

Sorry, but if that's all you've got, I call bullshit. Too much doesn't add up.

Printer manufacturers have high enough resolution to do this, yet only put out 600dpi/1200dpi boxes, where you can easily enough see jaggies with the naked eye?

If the dots are really that small, they could be messed up just by bleed in average quality printer paper.

Alternatively, this isn't a microdot in the classic meaning of the term, but rather the system is supposed to rely on the relative positions of the dots on the page, with dots spaced inches apart? How is that going to help fight conterfeiting? I don't know many bank notes that come in handy US letter or A4 size for counterfeiting convenience.

You say your department has never had to look up a serial number for the authorities, yet strangely according to TFA, the authorities seem to do this all the time with other makers?

Only a tiny number of people in your department know how to do this, it's all so secret that other printer manufacturers cited in TFA wouldn't even comment and you can't tell us how to find the things, yet you're prepared to identify your employer, thus practically waving a flag about who you are and the fact that you're willing to disclose this sort of information?

There's no obligation to register where you buy your printer, nor to notify anyone of selling it on, so there's nothing to connect to the serial number unless someone bothers transferring warranty information (even after the usually pretty naff warranty has expired).

And here's the kicker: governments all over the world use these things. If there were security marks being printed on their documents, they would know about it, not least because they all do it routinely with confidential documents themselves. How am I supposed to believe that government departments are allowed to use these things when anything they print could be traced back to exactly where it comes from by someone who isn't cleared by that government's security people, and works in another country?

Sorry, but this just doesn't ring true. There is absolutely no factual information in either TFA or all your posts to this thread that's good enough to reproduce this effect reliably, and what's more I'm looking at full-page print-outs from two colour printers, following the directions given in TFA, and unable to see anything even remotely resembling what's described.

I'm happy to change my view on this if more information is provided, but I'm very sceptical about this whole story right now.

Re:Conspiracy theory for the day

[papaskunk (718169)]

First of all, the effect is purported only to be incorporated in certain high-quality laser devices. The typical ink-jet printer and even your standard SOHO/business-class color printer/copier can't get even close to the quality of reproducing currency, not to mention the ridiculously difficult process of implementing color management. So why would they bother? We are talking about high-quality, high-speed professional output devices. Secondly, you attack the grandparent, yet ignore evidence (the Doc12) presented in the article. And third, much of what you write is simply innacurate. There's been some discussion here about rewriting the drivers. Believe me, this has nothing to do with drivers or even printer firmware. This is all happening in-RIP. What is a RIP? It's a Raster Image Processor, and it's a dedicated box that specifically translates printer files, be it PCL 5, 6, or PostScript, into the raster image that will be printed on the page. Guess what? Nobody buys a $6,000-$40,000 RIP or a $20,000 high-speed printer without getting a service contract to go with it. And what do you need when you have a service contract? A serial number, of course. Also, your statement that 1200 dpi output produces visible jaggies, is patently false. Pick up a book and look at it. The paper in that book was inked by an impression cylinder, which was inked by a plate, which was probably made from film, which was produced by an imagesetter, which received a file from a RIP that was -- wait, let's take a guess, how much? -- about 1200 dpi! 1200 dpi was specifically chosen because the human eye cannot see the corners of the dots. Every printed piece you look at was RIPped at about 1200dpi. And yes, microdots are real. Microdots, sometimes called spots, are what make up dots. The 600/300 lpi (lines per inch, not dots per inch) quality limit has everything to do with a) the ability of the RIP software to rasterize an image into line screens, and b) the reality that dot gain ('bleed', as you call it) makes printing 4-color process impossible at much higher of a line screen. But is it possible to lay down one microdot/spot, all by itself, and for it to stay just fine without interference from any other nearby dots? Of course! Even your ink jet can do this, by simply spraying out a bit of ink as the nozzle closes. Believe me, they do this at HP. Give the poster a break. Obviously, he works for a small company. Xerox, on the other hand, happens to have an exclusive contract with Kinko's, so there's about 5,000 Doc12's out there with bored college kids messing around with them on the night shift. Are you telling me you think nobody's ever even tried to counterfeit currency? Your stubbornness amazes me viewed in context with your absolute ignorance to the subject. Sincerely, Ryan Kirk

Re:Tinfoil printouts

[Cali Thalen (627449)]

Probably less than 1mm, and you wouldn't probably notice it.

The Lexmark Optra N I'd used for several years at work turned out to be one of these. VERY faint yellow dots on the white parts of the border (I didn't test it on anything full-bleed though, so no idea what it would look like under those circumstances).

I'd used that printer for light-to-moderate graphics work for a long time, and never noticed. Heck, I barely noticed when I knew what to look for, but it was most certainly there.

Do as I say, not as I do

[A Boy and His Blob (772370)]

I wonder if the government will be using these printers themselves, they have more to hide than anyone else. Now when a confidential document is leaked it can be more easily tied to a government official.

Re:Do as I say, not as I do

[XxtraLarGe (551297)]

I wonder if the government will be using these printers themselves, they have more to hide than anyone else.

Which is exactly why it should be REQUIRED for all government offices, and optional for citizens. Remember, "Where the people fear their government, there is tyranny, where the government fears its people, there is Liberty." - T. Jefferson (? sorry, quote's off the top of my head)

Re:Do as I say, not as I do

[ObjetDart (700355)]

I wonder if the government will be using these printers themselves, they have more to hide than anyone else. Now when a confidential document is leaked it can be more easily tied to a government official.

There was an interview on NPR a few weeks ago with Michael Smith, the British journalist who uncovered the "Downing Street Memo." He said that governments already do this: when a classified document is distributed, they often introduce subtle changes in wording from one copy to the next, so that each person receives a very slightly different copy. That way, in theory if the document is leaked, they can figure out who leaked it.

For once that "Soviet Russia" thing applies

[doublem (118724)]

Back during the Cold War, anyone who owned a typewriter was required to submit a typing sample to the government. The idea was to create a database so to assist in tracking any given document to a specific typewriter.

The US Government has removed the ambiguity from this process, and made it far easier to definitely tie a document to a printer.

Well, except for the fact that I'm sure the government has a couple printers lying around that can add whatever serial number and printer model they want.

Re:As they should

[aslate (675607)]

A time for Yes Minister quotage i think:

Sir Humphrey: "Bernard, the Official Secrets Act was not put in place to protect the secrets, it's there to protect the officials."

And

Sir Humphrey: "In the spirit of "Open Government", one should always make public anything that can easily be discovered by some other way."

"Evil" Printers?

[goldspider (445116)]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

(I got it first!!!)

Re:"Evil" Printers?

[Richard_at_work (517087)]

Im sorry, but the word 'evil' is really being used far too much on slashdot to talk about stuff that isnt evil in anyway, shape or form. It reminds me of the RIAAs usage of the word 'steal', and both parties are using the words wrongly to provide a very specific view in other peoples minds of things that they personally do not like IMHO.

Re:"Evil" Printers?

[Suppafly (179830)]

Except the Evil is subjective and Steal has a definite meaning.

Re:"Evil" Printers?

[SatanicPuppy (611928)]

They both have definite meanings. What you mean is, "'Evil' doesn't have a legal definition and 'steal' does."

Don't confuse legality and morality; they are unrelated.

Yes, Evil.

[Tackhead (54550)]

> Im sorry, but the word 'evil' is really being used far too much on slashdot to talk about stuff that isnt evil in anyway, shape or form. It reminds me of the RIAAs usage of the word 'steal', and both parties are using the words wrongly to provide a very specific view in other peoples minds of things that they personally do not like IMHO.

The EFF is concerned about this technology because they've read their history books. And because some people who participated in writing the history books... had to be very careful about what they printed those books on. And because the systems of government used in the Warsaw Pact countries from 1917-1991 was - to many people, myself included - "evil".

I posted this a few months ago, the last time the topic came up. This is not just about counterfeiting. (And as a guy who likes money, I hate counterfeiters with a passion almost equalled to my hatred of spammers, which is pretty freakin' intense.)

In Soviet Romania [google.com] [google.com], a sample page from every typewriter had to be registered with the police, so that any samizdat produced could be quickly traced back to the typewriter's owner. Use your imagination as to what happened to the owner, or Google for it.

In Romania every typewriter had to be registered with a local magistrate. Samples of letters typed on these machines had to be produced under the observation of the secret police so they could trace underground publishing activity.

- G. Davey, Christian Publishing: Before and After the Communist Collapse

In Soviet Russia [geocities.com] [geocities.com], all photocopiers were registered with the KGB and kept in secure rooms, to which physical access was restricted.

Some samizdat works, mostly magazines, were typed on typewriter. The copies were indistinct and hard to read. I realized that the movement against violating human rights was doomed to be an eternal amusement of the few intellectuals without proper copyprinters. But where could one find a copyprinting machine in the country, where all the copiers were affixed with seals at night and placed in the special rooms where only proved KGB members could work on it. There was the only decision - to make the machine ourselves. It had to be easy to make and quite efficient.

- A. A. Bolonkin, Memoirs of Soviet Political Prisoner

The West is probably still playing catch-up.

I understand now!

[ErikTheRed (162431)]

This explains all of the random pin-misfires I'm having on my dot-matrix printer! Thank God that it's just my government protecting me from terrorists^H^H^H counterfeiters.

Here's one

[Rosco P. Coltrane (209368)]

My old Epson LX: printouts are so atrocious you just know they come from an LX: they embed the printer model in the form of smears and distortion in the text.

Then again, I just use it to print listings, it's not exactly photo-quality...

Finding Evil Printers

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

Finding Evil Printers should be easy. Just test for the Evil Bit.

Dead giveaways

[winkydink (650484)]

The print heads rotate 360 degrees while ejecting green ink at great force and saying, "your mother svcks cocks in hell".

Getting the word out

[rocketman768 (838734)]

EFF deserves a bit of respect for this. They're trying to let everyone else know what companies are doing behind their little white walls to lock you down. Personally, I'm going to make a donation right now to EFF. They need some big-time exposure to change the normal cow-like brainless mob of AOL users into intelligent thinkers.

Re:Getting the word out

[ntk (974)]

It's not true that the EFF "only cares about the US", although its true the core of our expertise is in that country. We now have three people working on international issues. Cory Doctorow works in Europe; Gwen Hinze, an Australian, works on WIPO and free trade agreement issues. Ren Bucholz has just moved up to Canada and will shortly be taking on the job of policies in the Americas.

And EF Canada *is* still around.

Do an exchange...

[tktk (540564)]

If you think you've done something illegal or just don't want to be tracked, I'll take the fall for you.

Send your current model color laser printer to me. I'll even send you a 7 year old inkjet that I currently use as a footrest.

Epson 1280 photo printer

[joejoejoejoe (231600)]

I think my Epson 1280 does.

If I print anything, even one line of text from notepad, it will print the text, advance the sheet of paper most of the way, print something else you can't really see, then spit out the paper.

I think this is a good test. If you are printing only to the top of the page, and then it appears to spend time printing where you had no text, you've got one of these...

-Joejoejoejoe

If you print a single line of text in notepad...

[by Anonymous Coward]

It's prints "Page 1" at the bottom, dumb ass.

Stupid question but...

[Pakaran2 (138209)]

How exactly is this supposed to work? I buy a printer with cash from Office Max, take it home, and print some phony money. The money is reported to the secret service, which takes it to the printer manufacturer, which tells them that the printer was shipped to an Office Max in my town.

Assume I had the common sense to only use the printer for counterfeiting. What exactly do they do now? Get a warrant for every house within 50 miles of said Office Max, and check the serial number on all the printers?

Re:Stupid question but...

[purduephotog (218304)]

Say the cashier remembers you because she thought you were cute. ... or scary. ... or nervous.

Say there are CCTV tapes that still exist; each is checked for the POS timestamp. Each face is added to a 'question' list. You get a knock on your door when someone recognizes you or from your drivers license photo.

Say you left fingerprints on the paper you used to print the bogus green backs.

Say you go to stock up on Green Dye number 5 and trigger an alert clerk to write down your license plate, since the Feds had already passed out flyers stating to be on the lookout for individuals purchasing large quantities of this ink as it was used to finance terrorism (we all want to help, right?). Never mind the cash reward.

Say you buy more quality linen paper reams and someone notes the sale within 200 miles of your OD.

Say they just get damn lucky and lookup your slashdot ID.

There are hundreds of ways to screw up when you've broke the law. They just need one break. You need a perfect record of not making one.

Re:Stupid question but...

[blackmonday (607916)]

What makes you think a driver can't call home and register your IP Address to the printer serial number? OR - maybe you sent in a mail in rebate for the printer? Just because you're paranoid don't mean they're not after you.

I Wonder

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

You might be able to see the small, scattered yellow dots printed there that could be used to trace the document back to you...put the "serial number of each machine coded in little yellow dots" in every printout. The millimeter-sized dots appear about every inch on a page, nestled within the printed words and margins.

And here I was thinking all along that it was just a crappy printer that messed up every inch or so.

Maybe I could add a few more of mine in Photoshop just to make things more interesting.

Better that than suggesting that Xerox (and Canon and HP) should be shot for caving into foreign governments who use this to suppress free speech, all the while not telling us that they're doing it.

Evil Printers...

[creimer (824291)]

What kind of evil are we talking about here? The kind where replacement cartridges cost more than the printer itself? Or drivers that are fully supported under Windows but Linux requires black magic to work? Or that cables are not included?

It's nice to see the EFF trying to stamp out the evil printers. But there's a lot of work to be done.

Ask Publius about this

[orthogonal (588627)]

From the article: "Lorelei Pagano, a counterfeiting specialist with the U.S. Secret Service, stresses that the government uses the embedded serial numbers only when alerted to a forgery. "The only time any information is gained from these documents is purely in [the case of] a criminal act," she says."

Somebody ask

• Alexander Hamilton (later the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, the same Treasury that Lorelei Pagano now works for),
• James Madison (later fourth President of The United States), or
• John Jay (later first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court)

why they published the Federalist Papers anonymously under the name "Publius".

Ask them if they'd have been able to write the these brilliant arguments that shaped the Constitution of the United States of America if the very paper they'd printed it on could have been used to strip then of their anonymity?

Could they have made their arguments as forcefully, would they have allowed their ideas to have been so revolutionary, if they had known any political opponent could trace those papers back to them, perhaps deny them jobs or political offices because of disagreement with their ideas?

Would we even have the Constitution that we have today if these great men had not been able to use the pen-name "Publius"?

Hamilton and Madison and Jay forged (ahem) our Constitution in anonymity, but counterfeiting specialist Lorelei Pagano tells us that those three silly boys didn't need their anonymity? That in order to be safe from counterfeiters, we have to give up our right to anonymous politically agitation?

How much more security can this country -- this nation conceived in anonymity -- survive?

anonymous coward

[alvinrod (889928)]

Nice to see the anonymous coward option existed way back then too!

I wonder if they used their karma bonus though?

Personally I'm guessing they did it so the British or anyone else didn't mod them '-1 DEAD!'

Defeats the presumed anonymity..

[lelitsch (31136)]

How do "most people expect anonymity from the documents they print?"

Printed pages are NEVER anonymous. Apart from fingerprints, DNA traces, ink and paper matching, how many people print stuff that they pass out anonymously? Most letters have a sender, books and other prints have a copyright note. And once you distribute any printed materials, others can trace it back.

If you go to the trouble to buy the printed at Best Buy at a best buy 500 miles from your home with cash that you got from a bank while wearing a full body condom and face mask, don't transport it in your car, and keep it in a clean room at an anonymous location, I agree that you probably expect privacy. But at that point, you have probably been arrested as a weirdo somewhere along the way.

My Database is Bigger than Yours

[Nom du Keyboard (633989)]

You can also help us through a more hands-on approach. If you own, operate, or have legitimate access to color laser printers or color photocopiers, please print the eight test sheets provided below on each of the machines to which you have access and send them to EFF.

Do this, and the EFF will have a larger, more diverse database of printer identifications than any manufacturer. And just where's their Privacy Policy on this?

Missing the point...

[metapy (903123)]

I think many of you are missing the point here. This is NOT to be able to take a document and track it back to a specific printer, but rather to irrefutably link the document and the printer.

"They" will never find a counterfeit document and then look for the printer, they will find the printer and then link the documents printed as corroborating evidence. This will be used once a suspect is available and a with a search warrant present and the printer seized, now with the micro-dot encoded serial number they can prove that Document A was definitely printed on Xerox Model X3Y Serial number: sdf78s6d5sdf46s4df98 which resides in the office a Mr. John Q. Public. at 321 Main St. Spingfield, MA; this removes plausibly deniability from the case. No more will a printed document carry any form of anonymity, there will be no reasonable doubt if this is called into evidence at a trial, do you REALLY want an almost iron-clad evidence of every document printed to be available?

Replace the yellow ink?

[GlobalEcho (26240)]

I understand the marking is done with yellow ink. It seems one would be able to expose a lot of these printers by replacing (or contaminating) the yellow ink with black.

Ittsy-bittsy-dots...

[RagingChipmunk (646664)]

Easy counter measure: When you print out your great govt conspiracy expose, take the set to the Office Max where you bought the tagging-printer and photo-copy the document.

Retail photocopiers wont catch the yellow-on-white and the small size of the dot because their resolution is too crappy. The copier does the work of getting rid of your tracks.

Now burn the originals and leak anonymously!! Woohoo.

Re:Ittsy-bittsy-dots...

[by Anonymous Coward]

well, it works and it doesn't. The copier you use will not notice the dots (too small), but it will tag it's own set of dots on there (and yes i know. I'm a colour tech for a very large copier company)

Irony

[eagl (86459)]

Won't it be priceless when the EFF's lawsuit is dismissed in the name of homeland security, and the next day they're told to hand over all of their collected "evidence", also in the name of homeland security? And of course if they ever reveal that they've been told to hand over the information, they'll all be tossed in jail without charges other than violating some classified measure in the so-called "patriot act".

At least they're not photographing train stations, public parks, or doing something else equally dangerous to national security, but just think of the intelligence goldmine present in all those test pages being sent to the EFF. A goon...er...security agent could get a promotion out of this!

In Soviet Russia (not a joke)

[phr1 (211689)]

typewriters and copying machines all had to be registered with the government, so they could trace the origin of any printed material. There were many incidents of underground publishing called "samizdat" that got around the registration system at great risk. Mikhail Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margherita" was initially circulated as samizdat and Bulgakov later won the Nobel Prize in Literature. That could only happen because it was very hard to tell where any particular copy came from.

The US will not make the same mistake the USSR did. If another Bulgakov surfaces in Dubya's America, this printer-ID technology will rat him out before that freedom-hating Nobel Prize Committee has a chance to work its evil. Why does the EFF hate America?

Counterfeiting? At /these/ prices?

[jesdynf (42915)]

Have you seen what color ink is going for lately? Be lucky to break even if you printed anything smaller than 20s.

Re:This might help out my business...

[Rosco P. Coltrane (209368)]

It reminds me of the old joke (or was it true?):

Some amateur counterfeiter was driving around the Appalachians to find some hillbillies to swindle. He found a couple of dumb-looking guys sitting on their front porch, stopped the car and said, waving a freshly printed note: "any of you guys have change for a $18 bill?". One of the guys reach in his pocket and says: "sure, d'ya want 2 nines or 3 sixes?"

Like, say, printing flyers for a protest?

[adb (31105)]

This administration is neither the first nor the last one to use law enforcement officers to harrass the opposition. Practical freedom of the press is undermined when it is too hard to write anonymously.

Re:Umm...

[neurojab (15737)]

The only time when I can see this being useful to the Government is if I'm doing something wrong. You know, harassing my ex, threatening the President, and that junk.

So, in your view, privacy is unimportant unless you have something to hide? In that same vein, if you want privacy, are you automatically a criminal?

Let's say the government wants to put a chip in your car that tracks your movements ("to fight terrrorism"), Do you have anything to hide then? Perhaps you're going to terrorist school... shouldn't the cops know about that? Why not place the chip directly in your arm just to be safe? Why not, then have everyone get permission from the government to move around the country? If they have nothing to hide, why should it be trouble to ask for permission? Why should people protest the actions of the government if they love their country? Perhaps they are criminals too.

The invasion of privacy is something we must always fight, because it's a slippery slope, and we will never get back what we once had. The loss of privacy means the death of democracy.

Re:The first thing I think about....

[Trigun (685027)]

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't make it any less true.

You want to stop counterfitters? Design real money, instead of the single-colour, same sized bills that they keep making. Take the mom-and-pop operations out of the picture, then work on the foreign governments, and organized criminals.

Re:Snakeoil?

[Pxtl (151020)]

If it's behind the laser window, you're screwed. Optics are touchy to a level that can only be described as premenstrual.

Re:Greenpeace?

[radish (98371)]

Dude, I think you got lost on that last inter-dimensional jump. This is the dimension where the earth is round, the sky is blue and Greenpeace is a charity that saves Whales & Dolphins. I think you want the one where they blew up the twin towers and Al Quaeda run a Gorilla sanctuary. I think it's the third on the left.