[James]

New computer software that can be used to make up speech from a recording of a person's voice. They say a 'watermark' will be added to the sound to identify the use of its software.

This has the potential to be seriously misused. For instance, being used to trick people over the phone.

Demonstration:

Youtube video

Adobe Voco 'Photoshop-for-voice' causes concern
7 November 2016

A new application that promises to be the "Photoshop of speech" is raising ethical and security concerns.

Adobe unveiled Project Voco last week. The software makes it possible to take an audio recording and rapidly alter it to include words and phrases the original speaker never uttered, in what sounds like their voice.

One expert warned that the tech could further undermine trust in journalism.

Another said it could pose a security threat.

However, the US software firm says it is taking action to address such risks.
Voice manipulation

At a live demo in San Diego on Thursday, Adobe took a digitised recording of a man saying "and I kissed my dogs and my wife" and changed it to say "and I kissed Jordan three times".

The edit took seconds and simply involved the operator overtyping a transcript of the speech and then pressing a button to create the synthesised voice track.

"We have already revolutionised photo editing. Now it's time for us to do the audio stuff," said Adobe's Zeyu Jin, to the applause of his audience.

He added that to make the process possible, the software needed to be provided with about 20 minutes-worth of a person's speech.

Dr Eddy Borges Rey - a lecturer in media and technology at the University of Stirling - was horrified by the development.

"It seems that Adobe's programmers were swept along with the excitement of creating something as innovative as a voice manipulator, and ignored the ethical dilemmas brought up by its potential misuse," he told the BBC.

"Inadvertently, in its quest to create software to manipulate digital media, Adobe has [already] drastically changed the way we engage with evidential material such as photographs.

"This makes it hard for lawyers, journalists, and other professionals who use digital media as evidence.

"In the same way that Adobe's Photoshop has faced legal backlash after the continued misuse of the application by advertisers, Voco, if released commercially, will follow its predecessor with similar consequences."
ID checks

The risks extend beyond people being fooled into thinking others said something they did not.

Banks and other businesses have started using voiceprint checks to verify customers are who they say they are when they phone in.

One cybersecurity researcher said the companies involved had long anticipated something like Adobe's invention.

"The technology is new but its underlying principles have been understood for some time," said Dr Steven Murdoch from University College London.

"Biometric companies say their products would not be tricked by this, because the things they are looking for are not the same things that humans look for when identifying people.

"But the only way to find out is to test them, and it will be some time before we know the answer."

Watermark checks

Google's DeepMind division showed off a rival voice-mimicking system called WaveNet in September.

But at the time, it suggested that the task needed too much processing power to find its way into a consumer product in the near future.

For its part, Adobe has talked of its customers using Voco to fix podcast and audio book recordings without having to rebook presenters or voiceover artists.

But a spokeswoman stressed that this did not mean its release was imminent.

"[It] may or may not be released as a product or product feature," she told the BBC.

"No ship date has been announced."

In the meantime, Adobe said it was researching ways to detect use of its software.

"Think about watermarking detection," Mr Jin said at the demo, referring to a method used to hide identifiers in images and other media.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37899902

[Jamie89]

It's interesting technology but I agree that it could be dangerous. I just don't see the point in it as well, what benefit is there?

And the watermark thing sounds really vague, all he could say was it was something they were trying to do, but I don't see how a watermark could be added to audio, and even if something could be done it would be quite easy for someone else with audio editing software to remove it surely?

[Toy Soldier]

Where I can really see it being abused, is against people who aren't tech savvy. e.g. someone recording an elderly person's son/daughter and then when they know they are about to go out shopping or whatever, calling them up with the voice saying "Hey mum, I need to get something from your house, can you put a key under the mat and leave the alarm off please?"

Easy burglary . Don't make a mess, take small valuable items. Then the police ask why they left a key, they say their daughter asked them to... daughter says they never made that call... everyone thinks poor old betty is losing her marbles... assume she just lost or misplaced her jewelry and that there was no break in at all.

In fact if they're careful enough there's a good chance that no one would even know that anything had been stolen for months... just stealing "hidden away" valuables that no one actually looks at.

*purchases software*
*new career* ... ...

[James]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

It's interesting technology but I agree that it could be dangerous. I just don't see the point in it as well, what benefit is there?

And the watermark thing sounds really vague, all he could say was it was something they were trying to do, but I don't see how a watermark could be added to audio, and even if something could be done it would be quite easy for someone else with audio editing software to remove it surely?

I guess the watermarking would be sound added that was at frequencies the human ear can't hear.

Inevitably, it will be cracked - or a version will come out from someone that doesn't have the watermark added.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by James

I guess the watermarking would be sound added that was at frequencies the human ear can't hear.

Inevitably, it will be cracked - or a version will come out from someone that doesn't have the watermark added.

I don't know, various hacking groups never managed to successfully crack the Cinavia protection on the PS3 (anti-piracy using audio markers, similar but not identical to this sort of watermarking). I always used my PS3 for my downloads until Cinavia ruined it .