Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 6:54 a.m. No.2309565   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9567

sha256 hashes are computed as the image is posted

So when I download an image, and it doesn't end up to have the exact same hash, then that means that the image has been modified after it was posted, or in other words, that it is different from the original one posted.

That modification can be of any type – but it has nothing to do with potential steganographic content

Stop sighing, and come up with more plausible explanations, and stop pretending you're the only one "in the know".

Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 7:07 a.m. No.2309643   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9715

For those trying to do stego on the images:

So called "steganon" [4c712f] obviously is a faggot shill with 13 posts when the bread doesn't even have 160, using standard phrases to blend in – blender, lol!

He's "willing to help us now" … bahahaha

Go away little boy!

Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 7:32 a.m. No.2309812   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2309765

Here are two (not the best/only tools probably but work on PNG) examples, just from a quick search

 

github.com/zed-0xff/zsteg

github.com/b3dk7/StegExpose (uses java – I don't like that too much)

 

For JPEG you can try and use stegdetect, like posted in last bread.

Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 7:38 a.m. No.2309860   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9965

>>2309770

Uploaded my version of the image, which has the correct sha256sum.

anonfiles.com/Ibw76af0b9/Inkedq_LI.jpg

 

But after download, double-check the hash – don't know if anonfiles changes anything …

Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 8:03 a.m. No.2310028   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0072

>>2309965

Not sure if I understand correctly, but just for testing downloaded the image from the anonfiles just now, and the result still has the correct hash.

 

Haven't looked into extracting anything from it (yet) – an anon yesterday mentioned he did extract one file … but wouldn't know

>>2303845

Anonymous ID: 8c2820 July 27, 2018, 8:15 a.m. No.2310124   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2310072

Got it, thanks for clarifying.

Later, once we find anything, maybe it'd be useful to ask all anons to check their image archives for correct hashes and gather all images that are original (by hash) …

I only have roughly 130 or so images (out of more than 400) with accurate hashes (as originally posted).