@futurebird Isn't that what RAW files are for?

@futurebird there was a thing like this without the server part and it made the photos inadmissable in court if I remember right

because it was storing the metadata using steganography and that technically counts as modifying the image

@ben

Talk about backfiring.

Also currently images are used in court that have no metadata, it depends on chain of custody I thought.

@stilescrisis

Is it only possible for a camera to generate that kind of file? I thought they could be faked.

@futurebird @ben I'm guessing there is a potential use for digital signature and/or some kind of block chain directly on the device to ensure provenance (including image+GPS data+timestamp).

Some kind of "stamped" camera for journalists.

@gdupont @ben

I suspect that like most digital trust systems it still comes down to the chain of custody.

Currently what makes a photo "real" is that someone says that they took it and they are hopefully trustworthy.

The idea of this company would be to sell it to businesses that want to show they have an extra layer of trust.

Real estate, court evidence, ID photos things like that.