27 Central Banks Push Anti-Counterfeit Software 400
securitas writes "GlobeTechnology reports that the 27-member Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group is behind the anti-counterfeit software in Adobe Photoshop CS, Ulead PhotoImpact, Jasc Paint Shop Pro and others. Consortium members of the Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group include the USA, Canada, Germany, Japan, Australia and many more. Law enforcement agencies and banknote-issuing authorities say that it is a response to the rapid growth of digital counterfeiting. The software is distributed free of charge to hardware and software manufacturers and is voluntary to use. But the European Union is drafting legislation to force manufacturers to include anti-counterfeit measures in all systems, scanners or printers sold in Europe. Counterfeiting and anti-counterfeiting with Adobe Photoshop and other products like inkjet printers have been the subject of recent discussion on Slashdot."
Re:If I've learned nothing else in 20+ years of le (Score:2, Informative)
Just use NZ coins in Australia, they're the same size and metal content and have the Queen's head on them, but they're cheaper. Machines don't know the difference, most Australians don't bother looking or care enough.
Re:Dare I suggest... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:4, Informative)
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:5, Informative)
The software looks at 5 dots appearing (multiple times) on every money used in the EU.
There was even a link to a pdf file [cam.ac.uk].
Re:I've seen software add watermarks to images (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin? (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed, the main anger at the Stamp Act in the American colonies was because it required payment in hard coinage, and most people didn't have hard currency, not so much as a penny.
A brief history of paper money [moneymuseum.com]
KFG
Hack (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Trimming the edges (Score:5, Informative)
You're right. It's called the Eurion Constellation [cam.ac.uk].
Re:Dare I suggest... (Score:5, Informative)
- The watermark - the faint image similar to the large portrait, which is part of the paper itself and is visible from both sides when held up to the light.
- The security thread - also visible from both sides when held up to the light, this vertical strip of plastic is embedded in the paper. "USA TWENTY" and a small flag are visible along the thread.
- The color-shifting ink - the numeral "20" in the lower-right corner on the face of the note changes from copper to green when the note is tilted. The color shift is more dramatic and easier to see on the new-design notes.
All three are useful anti-counterfeiting measures; there's no disputing that. However, if you look at Australia's techniques, there are two levels of protection: the blatently obvious, and the more subtle.What do I mean by that? Well, the clear window is "blatently obvious". You see it, and it's immediately obvious that it's meant to be there; it's part of the design of the note. As you encounter more notes, you come to realise that it's seamless; it "feels" no different to the rest of the note. So when Joe Blow comes up to you and offers you a note with a window that doesn't quite fit, you quickly realise that it can't be a real note -- it has to be a fake. Anybody -- from any country -- should be able to pick up on that without too much trouble.
The more subtle things are things like the tiny writing (saying, for example, "FIFTY DOLLARS"); the seven point star that reveals itself only when you hold the note up to the light; that sort of thing. The seven point star actually is somewhere between "ultra subtle" and "obvious" -- looking at the note, it can be noticed without too much difficulty if you're observant.
I guess I'm saying that, to me at least, the new US $20 note doesn't follow what appears to be world's best practice, whilst the Australian note does. It's an improvement, yes, but it doesn't go as far as it could, and arguably, should. The more a currency is liable to be forged, the less value it will have in the long run, as nobody can trust the notes.
Just some random thoughts, is all.
The other thing is: to the best of my knowledge, Australia has had only two note designs in the period of decimal currency. The switch to plastic notes was well publicised, and started with the high value (and hence more often forged) notes, progressively replacing every note down to the five dollar (our two and one dollar denominations are coins these days, not notes). As xixax implies, redesigning your notes on a regular basis is not the best way to keep your currency safe from counterfeiting; in that sense, you are better off doing a major, major, MAJOR upgrade every, say, fifty years or so, rather than a string of minor upgrades every five or ten years. This sort of change to the US currency seems to me to be a minor revision, not a major overhaul...
Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin? (Score:5, Informative)
Thwarting Conterfeiters (Score:5, Informative)
These plastic notes are physically colored and include clear sections, as opposed to being blank paper with colors printed on them.
One of the other reasons was the durability of the notes.
Oddly enough, when they first came out many people tried to IRON them to remove the wrinkles (they take hard creases very easily) - evey seen a shrinky-dink after it's been baked?
Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin? (Score:2, Informative)
How many people do you know who have a supply of plastic to print on that feels like a real Aussie note? That and the clear windows [rba.gov.au] make it pretty hard for the casual back yard counterfieter to produce these on there canon bubble jet.
Re:completely voluntary... (Score:5, Informative)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What's the problem? (Score:5, Informative)
this brings up a very good point, though: the only true way to prevent counterfeiting is to have the legitimate currency producer have exclusive and restricted access to the materials required to mint money, those being:
- paper
- ink
if the paper and ink are noticably unique to money and access to those materials is restricted to the minter, counterfeiters are out of luck - no mater what software they have.i should note that in canada the new $100 bill really stresses unique inks as an anti-counterfeit measure - there's translucent printing, a holographic stripe and some funky watermarks. read up on it here [thestar.com].
even my city's municipal currency [calgarydollars.ca] (a local "barter" currency) uses this crazy plasticized paper that is custom designed for printing money and is only sold to legit minters.
so, go ahead and get that old version of photoshop and yr swank inkjet... it won't do you any good if you want to make canadian $100's or calgary $1's!
Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin? (Score:4, Informative)
No, actually the reason cash replaced barter is precisely because barter doesn't work very well in complex societies built on specialization and division of labor. Any time I have something you want, but you don't have anything I want, bartering quickly devolves into an absurdly complex multilateral negotiation. General_re grows corn. CaptainTux keeps hogs and would like the corn for pig feed. But general_re doesn't want hogs - he wants a new tractor. Mr. X has tractors, but he doesn't want corn or hogs - he wants a laborer to help him make tractors.
And so forth. Much easier to simply agree in advance on a medium of exchange. CaptainTux gives general_re cash in exchange for corn, general_re exchanges cash for a tractor, and Mr. X exchanges cash for the services of a tractor assembler. It's all faster and easier that way, because it can all be done in a series of one-on-one exchanges - we no longer have to convene a roundtable discussion, where every single party sits down at the same time and negotiates an arrangement that satisfies everyone.
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:4, Informative)
This came up lst time this was asked here. The detection is based on a pattern of circles, hidden/featured in most notes of most currencies.
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:2, Informative)
Notes are identical across the EU.
No they are not. Several countries have not joined the European Monetary Union, like UK, Denmark and Sweden.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.minfin.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=7433A
and her for the coins.
http://www.minfin.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=08B64
Note though, that every country has his own design on one side and the "universal" euro design on the other side.
Re:gimp and sane illegal (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What's the problem? (Score:1, Informative)
Copying holograms is simply impossible without the source.
Secondly. Extending the "legal arm" to outside the police/law force onto comercial companies is a _very_ bad thing.