Yes, your color printer is spying on you

I use to work for Xerox, and I've spent most of my life working in or around
businesses like Grumman Allied, Homerwood, PPG, Channelock, smaller
manufacturing (tool and die) shops, lawyers offices, hospitals, county
library systems, court houses, police stations and city offices, oil
industry logging and perforating operations, forrestry services, jewelers,
card shops, mom and pop type computer stores and public internet access
points, and even one ISP. I'd say off the top of my head, about 85% of
these consider properly configured equipment an issue. That includes having
proper times and dates displayed when needed.

But if the copier has a clock with *NO KNOWN FUNCTION*, who would
bother to set it? If they even knew it existed? Now, if they were
actually using a log of who copied how much, or used a fax transmission
log often, or whatever, they'd worry more about it. But I don't
recall working at or seeing a place where you had to identify
yourself to the copier to make copies, and just a time log of copies
made with no added data seems rather worthless.

In some cases it's a primary concern. Like medical and legal applications
for instance. And in some cases it's absolutely essential.

Medical applications read funny squares of yellow dots in a code
that's only recently been cracked?

It's also
essential in many cases where a business has a service contract with their
copier or printer vendor.

Why? Are you saying the copier's clock is the only thing capable
of determining when the warranty or service contract expires?

If it's network-connected it can probably find out, say, from a
server at the printer manufacturer. If it's a low-end printer
connected through a parallel port to a computer, how would it
get the date?

From the PC it's connected to.

What software on the PC does that? A generic driver for a printer
isn't going to know how to set time on a large variety of printers
that MIGHT be connected, and it doesn't have a way of guessing
which one really is connected.

Most printer drivers are hardware centric if not hardware specific. That's
why they're product specific drivers. And in many cases we're not talking
about "drivers" in the home user sense, but full blown networking
applications.

Especially on the network-capable printers, I don't ever recall
having to install a product-specific driver on any computer that
sent print jobs to the printer. Or even tell anything what model
printer it was, beyond "Postscript". Good thing, too, since I doubt
there'd be an available driver for a DEC Alpha. Of course, if it's
got network access to the internet, it can get time from NTP.

If it's a standalone copier, same issue?

From the person who maintains that copier.

People MAINTAIN copiers? You mean some company management actually
PAY for stuff like service contracts?

Many do. In fact most, once you get out of the realm of smaller shops or
shops where paper documents aren't as important as they might be in a more
"office" environment. And with some manufacturer's brands and models it's
absolutely essential. You have no choices.

FWIW, there's some very valid reasons for having copiers and other
standalone hardware know accurate times and dates. Businesses generally
like to keep track on such things, for instance.

So what does a business do with the clock that's useful? The copier
produces a log of when it is used? And perhaps who used it, as
identified by some code or key?

Track workloads and document creation times, date stamp hard copy and
electronic transmissions like faxes, schedule jobs, calculate completion
and delivery times, help document/manage QC, schedule maintenance, you
know... things that might revolve around or be affected by time.

Are you saying that there are copiers (not computer printers or fax
machines) that automatically stick the date and time on the copy
when it is made? In a form that's actually human-readable, not
some secret square of yellow dots? I've never heard of a copier
having that feature. Fax machines, yes, copiers, no. And I'd
consider it a real problem if it couldn't be turned off for at least
some copying jobs like, say, advertising flyers.

I don't see how a time stamp produced by a copier (not fax machine)
on the copy is going to help in scheduling jobs or maintenance, or
help in managing QC. Yes, having a time stamp on when you sent something
is useful.

Gordon L. Burditt

Gordon Burditt wrote:
But if the copier has a clock with *NO KNOWN FUNCTION*, who would
bother to set it? If they even knew it existed?

It's easy to make a clock that sets itself from radio signals.

Now, if they were
actually using a log of who copied how much, or used a fax transmission
log often, or whatever, they'd worry more about it. But I don't
recall working at or seeing a place where you had to identify
yourself to the copier to make copies,

Really? I've worked at lots of places where you had to have a copy
code to operate the copier. Usually that would just charge it to a
particular project, but it's still more tracking than just a log of
what time copies were made, because presumably each code is only
known to a small number of people.

- Logan

Logan Shaw wrote
Gordon Burditt wrote

But if the copier has a clock with *NO KNOWN FUNCTION*, who would bother to
set it? If they even knew it existed?

It's easy to make a clock that sets itself from radio signals.

Its not actually that easy to ensure it can always do that.

In spades without a decent antenna.

Now, if they were actually using a log of who copied how much, or used a fax
transmission log often, or whatever, they'd worry more about it. But I don't
recall working at or seeing a place where you had to identify yourself to the
copier to make copies,

Really? I've worked at lots of places where you had to have a copy code to
operate the copier. Usually that would just charge it to a particular
project, but it's still more tracking than just a log of what time copies were
made, because presumably each code is only known to a small number of people.

Or maybe its actually known to quite a few.

No more yellow dots and...

no more reds, greens, yellows, browns, oranges, etc.

Art

wrote:

wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:27:38 -0400, Impmon wrote:


Better solution: used printer or copy machines from anonymous source
like thrift shop,....
Let the original owner sweat while you make millions out of
counterfeit $20 bills.

Millions? Ok, one million would be 50.000 twenty dollar bills, and
if 'millions' means at leat two, then it would mean printing at least
100.000 twenty dollar bills. That would cost a fortune in yellow
ink!

Geo


Let the yellow run out then

1) save a fortune in yellow ink refills
2) no more yellow spy dots



Thanks to a previous poster for pointing out their
security work around )



How long are 100,000 bills going to take me to print?
I might have to get a few of these printers!

4Q

You are assuming that there is no system to trace the printer from
manufacturer to dealer to retailer to consumer.

Products like photocopiers and color laser printers could easily be
traced. Some computer stores scan some items' serial numbers in at the
till along with the SKU/UPC and it appears on my receipt.

Art

Shawn Hirn wrote:

In article ws.net,
"Mike T." wrote:


"ER" wrote in message
...

FROM NOW ON!

DO NOT REGISTER YOUR PRINTER WITH THE MANUFACTURER!!

ER


How will that help when the serial number is on each page printed? Yeah, it
might slow down the authorities tracking you, but when they find you, they'd
still have proof that YOUR printer was involved. -Dave


If you don't register your printer with the manufacturer, how is the
government going to identify that serial number back to you? At most,
they can associate that serial number with a physical printer, but if no
one knows where the printer with that serial number is located, your
privacy is preserved.

"your printer is embedding it's serial number and the date into each
color print it makes" hardly sounds as good as "your printer is spying
on you" does it?

;-)

Art

Rod Speed wrote:

Still not spying on you.

Arthur Entlich wrote:

The serial number and the date.

Art

Rod Speed wrote:


No it isnt, at most its recording what printer
a particular document was created on.

SSW wrote:

Rod,

Couldn't disagree more.

1) some printer will be identifiable to a specific individual or
certainly narrow down the possibilities, and "suspicion is 98/100ths of
the law"

2) moot... just because other things we begrudgingly accept also violate
our privacy doesn't excuse a new one. Further, there are specific
benefits associated with many of the things you mention, (like ID for
bank accounts, cameras in ATMs, ID for license plates) which either
offer the individual added features or protect them from types of fraud
however, this particular type of tracking mainly offers potential
advantage to law enforcement or others who wish to use the information
in an abusive manner.

3) Laws change as do those in power and those who enforce the law.
Something that isn't a crime today can easily be made into one tomorrow.
You have a naive world view and you obviously have never lived under
an oppressive government or understood how tracking information can be
used in illegitimate ways.

4) How intrusive it is we will have to wait and see. It depends on how
and who uses the information.

Art

Rod Speed wrote:

Jeffrey F. Bloss wrote:

rick++ wrote:


All printers have charisteristic quirks which can be used in court
cases. Its similar to the days when metal fonts on each typewriter
was slightly different in shape and angle.

That's true, but these markings are more than something that can
verify a copy coming from a given printer, they're indications of
which printer they came from *regardless* of any prior knowledge.
IOW, in the first scenario someone would have to have both the
printer and the page to make the connection. In the latter scenario,
the page reveals the machine all by itself.

A *huge* difference.


Xerox's identifiers justs makes it easier.

They make possible what was not possible before. Specifically, taking
any printed page and discerning it's origin with no other evidence at
all. Before this "tag" implementation an abusive government or
employer would typically have to sift through hundreds or thousands
of potential dissidents to build a list of potential targets. And
that list would be imperfect because the document might have been
printed at any time. Now, the document itself pinpoints at least the
machine it was printed on, and the exact time. And most likely a very
tiny list of targets as a result.


In essence, any of this sort of identification is
forcing someone to sign every document they print.


Nope, not when a particular printer cant
be associated with a particular individual.

ALL the authoritys know is that all the documents came
from one particular printer and the date it was printed etc.


It's a direct and indisputable assault against
privacy and anonymity, under the guise of "security".


Just like countless other situations are, like ID for bank
accounts, cameras in ATMs, ID for license plates, etc etc etc.


A punishment of the whole for the actions of the minority.


Bull****. No 'punishment' at all for those who dont breach the law.


Akin to fitting each and every citizen with an ankle bracelet because
a few have proved themselves deserving of electronic monitoring.


Nothing like. Not even as intrusive as social security numbers.

And unfortunately, much of what it does have to say, it does on yellowed
paper. One of the problems with "rights" documents is they tend to take
a few hundred years before they get updated to catch up with the last
few hundred years. ;-)

Art

Shaun Eli wrote:

I suggest that before people say it doesn't matter unless you break the
law, you go find a history book and read about The Federalist Papers,
which were instrumental in our country's foundation.

They were written anonymously by (we now know) Hamilton, Madison and
Jay.

Had they had a printer which they knew could reveal their identities,
they might not have written.

The First Amendment doesn't say anything about yellow toner.

Shaun Eli
www.BrainChampagne.com
Brain Champagne: Clever Comedy for the Smart Mind (sm)

Do you think "Rod Speed" is this person's real name? If not, what is
he/she hiding? Obviously, the use of an alias is grounds alone for
suspicion, especially from someone who otherwise claims he/she has
nothing to hide...

I'm sure this person will have no problem if we use the tools available
to determine who they really are, where they are living, their
affiliations, income, marital status, phone number, job, and medical
condition, and I'm sure they have no legal entanglements. While we are
at it, let's also do a bit of digging about any spouse, parents,
children, siblings... you get it.

So, perhaps a group of better qualified than I "explorers and
discoverers" might wish to take on Rod Speed as a project and see what
there is to be found?

Remember, he/she has nothing to hide.

DISCLAIMER: I am not actually advocating anyone who reads this do any
"spying" on "Rod Speed", but I would like "Rod Speed" to consider why
this digging of information might sound ominous and threatening.

Art




Jeffrey F. Bloss wrote:

Rod Speed wrote:


They make possible what was not possible before. Specifically, taking
any printed page and discerning it's origin with no other evidence at
all. Before this "tag" implementation an abusive government or
employer would typically have to sift through hundreds or thousands
of potential dissidents to build a list of potential targets. And
that list would be imperfect because the document might have been
printed at any time. Now, the document itself pinpoints at least the
machine it was printed on, and the exact time. And most likely a very
tiny list of targets as a result.

In essence, any of this sort of identification is
forcing someone to sign every document they print.

Nope, not when a particular printer cant
be associated with a particular individual.


Yeah, well... that's just been proved a whole lot easier in *all* cases, and
unavioadable in many or most.


ALL the authoritys know is that all the documents came
from one particular printer and the date it was printed etc.


If you discount everyone except off the shelf buyers who pay cash and buy
considerable distances from their homes, you have a point. If you include
the vast majority of personal and business consumers, you're simply looking
at the problem with very narrow vision.


It's a direct and indisputable assault against
privacy and anonymity, under the guise of "security".

Just like countless other situations are, like ID for bank
accounts, cameras in ATMs, ID for license plates, etc etc etc.


Red herring. Personal identification is an absolute necessity in those
scenarios. It's not necessary to the printing of a document.


A punishment of the whole for the actions of the minority.

Bull****. No 'punishment' at all for those who dont breach the law.


I'll be over tomorrow to install the software that tracks your every move on
the net. It's OK with you, right? You have nothing to hide after all...


Akin to fitting each and every citizen with an ankle bracelet because
a few have proved themselves deserving of electronic monitoring.

Nothing like. Not even as intrusive as social security numbers.


You're right. Social Security numbers are one of the most abused forms of
"identification" in use today. Thanks for pointing that out.

How sadly true.

And many people still do not have that ability worldwide.

Art

Jeffrey F. Bloss wrote:

Shaun Eli wrote:


I suggest that before people say it doesn't matter unless you break the
law, you go find a history book and read about The Federalist Papers,
which were instrumental in our country's foundation.

They were written anonymously by (we now know) Hamilton, Madison and
Jay.

Had they had a printer which they knew could reveal their identities,
they might not have written.


If they were published under the Orwellian rule of a government that had the
ability to collate every document to its author, we might not have retained
the right to even discuss this at *all*.