Secret Printer ID Codes May Be Illegal In the EU 229
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "In response to a query from a member of the EU Parliament, an EU commissioner issued an official statement (.DOC) saying that, while they do not violate any laws, secret printer tracking dot codes may violate the human right to privacy guaranteed by the EU's Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. If you don't remember what these are, Slashdot has discussed the issue before. In short, most color printers print small yellow dots on every sheet in a code that identifies the printer and, potentially, its owner. The EFF is running an awareness campaign, and a couple of years back made a start on deciphering the yellow dot code."
Human Rights or European Citizen Rights? (Score:5, Insightful)
First topic on the agenda: biometrics for visitors [slashdot.org].
Or was privacy only guaranteed to European Citizens?
Re:So, print color as shades of gray (Score:3, Insightful)
They are all color laser printers. In my color laser [newegg.com] printer, even the "freebie" toner cartridges that came with the printer last for 1,500 pages, and then I replaced them after 2,000 pages with high-capacity cartridges that last for 4,500 pages each.
Also, I am pretty sure all of them use 4 colors: cyan, magenta, yellow, and black, so that your "order confirmation" printing would only use the color toner that was needed.
"human right to privacy" (Score:4, Insightful)
however, in today's terror-terrorized (is that a new expression?) world, there IS no more 'right to privacy'.
I wish there was! but even in europe, there really is not a right to privacy.
even in the US constitution, is there ANY real clauses that talk about right to privacy? other than illegal search and seizure (which has been bastardized into 'we can invade your house and do a sneek-and-peek anytime we SAY so') - there is no right to privacy.
it should be added as a fundamental right, but I don't expect it anytime soon. too much power is gotton by violating your privacy. power is addicting and so the gov won't ever give THAT one back. horse has long left the barn..
Nobody noticed... (Score:4, Insightful)
What's worse is that we're so inured to this sort of thing, nobody even noticed!
Fenestrae delendae sunt.
Re:Prevent your printer from being registered (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Rather have safety than that degree of privacy. (Score:3, Insightful)
Benjamin Franklin
Re:Tag badsummary. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes but that doesn't mean that it could not be used by, say an agency that wishes to monitor who is distributing political leaflets for example. Looking at the US from the outside, freedom of speech and the press are wonderful - it seems that your government is accessing more and more ways to check how you are using those freedoms.
Re:Privacy is over-rated. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:regardless... (Score:1, Insightful)
Yeah. You absolutely DO NOT want to get on the wrong side of the European Court of Human Rights. If they were upset enough they might write you a strongly worded letter. If you were foolish enough to ignore the strongly worded letter they might start to sulk or even hold their breath until they passed out. You wouldn't want them to sulk or pass out now would you? I didn't think so.
Re:Simple enough fix (Score:3, Insightful)
If they are only there once, you could remove them.
If they are there once or multiple times, you can over print select dots and mess up the validity of the codes.
Re:Prevent your printer from being registered (Score:3, Insightful)
If your printer's serial # gets registered with the address on that tax return, and then you print some "illegal" stuff, it would come back to that person, but all they have to say is "I had ray-auch print my tax return", and then a single test-page from your printer would reveal that you printed both documents.
But, if the police don't care that much, then yeah, your plan would work.
At any rate, it would cause problems for the other person.
Re:Simple enough fix (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:NDA (Score:3, Insightful)
wait a second... (Score:3, Insightful)
And they are concerned whether printed paper contains a code that is not even tied to a person but merely a print engine? Don't make me laugh.
Re:sorry what privacy? (Score:3, Insightful)
But I suppose you could silkscreen it after printing it.
virtual MOD points. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, in theory adding random dots would introduce noise into the signal and potentially degrade it to the points it's no longer useful, but only if you can interfere with the pattern. Put another way, unless you know the location of the dot codes, to reach the level of noise necessary to obscure you'd have to cover the page; there would be so many random yellow dots so as to be perceptible.
Re:What about digital cameras? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like how they do ballistic analysis by finding a suspect's gun and fire off a few rounds and compare with rounds found at the scene of a crime.
That, however, is not so troubling to me. Tying a "weapon" to a "crime" after the fact is a pretty standard and legitimate technique. What I'm more troubled by is the idea that camera makers would *pre-emptively* record a unique fingerprint of each camera, *in case* it ever gets used to do something illegal, or just to snoop and follow a trail of photographs on the web or elsewhere. I don't have any evidence of this being done, but since printer makers are doing this, and scanner makers are doing something similar (blocking scans of currency and official-looking documents), I wouldn't put it past camera/sensor manufacturers...
Re:What about digital cameras? (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet when laws were passed required doing exactly that to sell a legal product in California, it was lauded as a wonderful idea.
But firearms don't count, I guess. I am glad in some ways that other's hobbies are now being treated with as much disdain as mine. Maybe in addition to the National Rifle Association we need the National Photography Association.
Re:What about digital cameras? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't pull out my Nikon and hold up a liquor store.
Not unless the clerk is REALLY vain.