One more time.

The PNG data fields within the image that Q posted last night appear to be possibly malformed (12 extra bytes that cannot be parsed, are not accounted for by the length of the preceding field, if interpreted as length would exceed the length of the entire file, precedes what appears to be a properly-formed IDAT data field filled with black pixels…) That might indicate the image contains additional data, beyond the visual data.

See my more detailed comments within the spreadsheet screen grab

(pic related)

>>147043

I correct myself. The number of bytes that do not parse correctly is SIXTEEN not 12.

>>147055

Thank you. I began parsing last night, went to bed & slept, got up and finished what is posted here, have not had a chance to read any threads since last night. Sorry if my work has duplicated yours.

I will abandon this not-very-fun line of research unless more evidence surfaces that it is worthwhile.

Would rather be making memes or whatever.

>>147079

The creative ferment of different minds doing different stuff but placing their thoughts into a central place sometimes stimulates the creative juices. Not always. Sometimes it is just darned annoying and distracting.

Somehow, we're still getting work done…

Due to its very format, this is an arduous workplace that weeds out the weak-willed and uncommitted… Anons who stay here have or develop a high tolerance for mental pain… The keks do lighten things up a bit.

>>147055

Sorry, what I found was a little different from what you describe. I found two IDAT chunks in the original file. I removed the second one (leaving the last 8 bytes: IEND+4) intact. Saved the file and opened it in GIMP. The text portion of the image is now replaced with black, truncating the text after the line that starts with "election …"

A specimen showing this is attached. NOTE: I have marked it MODIFIED - DO NOT USE so nobody will accidentally think this was the original file. It isn't.

I have no idea if what we are inspecting has any significance, but we should at least be able to replicate each other's methodology… and we haven't, yet.

I can think of numerous ways that a message could be concealed within an image…none of them things anyone could just stumble upon and decode without knowing the method that was used. Bit shift the data. Interpret a range of bytes within the image as a crypto key to another file. Use a crypto key provided elsewhere to decrypt this file. Add or subtract a certain value from a range of bytes. Examine a string of bytes at a specified offset (given elsewhere). Select individual bits or bytes whose locations(s) are given elsewhere. ….. ad nauseum.

UGH.