On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:20:56PM +0100, Marc Weber wrote: > Excerpts from John Beckett's message of Fri Feb 17 00:18:00 +0100 2012: > > Thanks, Bram has alerted me to that. I will be deleting it > > (and some related stuff) in about 24 hours. > The exif data does' not look suspicious. Wondering what the purpose of > this kind of spam is? > > winrar also is said to be able to "hide" bytes in jpeg files - but fails > on those.
The seganography angle actually makes a lot of sense, since the picture wasn't a goatse-style shock image. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography_tools If WinRAR can't extract the data, you could always try one of these: http://www.jjtc.com/Steganography/tools.html > But they are uncompresed - thus they may contain some unkown custom made > data information. > > At least one of those images can also be found on flickr (found by using > searching for the name in google) Maybe someone's just "testing the water" to see what they can get away with later? If their images are deleted a few hours later, then they'll know that's not a good place to hide their stegonography? What with MegaUpload being taken down, they may feel the need to find somewhere else to hide things in plain sight. -- Erik Falor Registered Linux User #445632 http://linuxcounter.net
pgpsQsV1dNI6f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
