How Banksy Authenticates His Work
reprage.comThere’s nothing cryptographic about this. It’s a central authority that either says “yes it’s real” or not. The system revolves around trust in that central authority. Everyone can easily fake a certificate which cannot be independently falsified without asking that central authority, who will be more likely to check their books than to do anything related to the actual certificate.
This is the second time in a couple weeks where I've seen a headline try to take a "crypto" angle for something ridiculously simple. There was another article touting drug cartels using "dollar bill serial numbers as random keys", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20484197, which was wrong - the keys weren't random, they were just unique and difficult to fake.
I get the sense, with the general failure of blockchain to live up to its hype beyond Bitcoin, that we'll see a lot of "crypto-" this and that nonsense, similar to how everything was "e-" this and that in 2000.
Does cryptographic imply decentralized?
No, but I think you'll agree that saying tears in a piece of paper "cryptography" is a stretch. It's not cryptography in the same way that a stamp or wax seal isn't cryptography, unless your definition of cryptography is "any method to protect the confidentiality and integrity of a document".
Do you consider ThreeBallot to be an example of cryptography? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThreeBallot
Cryptographic implies math is used, which doesn't seem to be the case here.
The word is much older than that.
> 1650s, "art of writing in secret characters"
That’s a rather restrictive definition of cryptography, don’t you think?
Well yes strictly speaking it's not just math, but usually it does imply math.
What are some examples of cryptography without math of some kind?
Character substitution comes to mind, as described in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventure_of_the_Dancing...
> It’s a central authority that either says “yes it’s real” or not.
/me looks at his browser CA roots
Browser uses cryptography, so one does not have to contact CA for every visit.
Banksy does not, so you do have to contact “CA” every time.
That’s right, the CA certificates in your browser can be tampered with because they aren’t the actual CA saying “yes it’s legit” they are a token containing a cryptographic key which claims to prove authenticity mathematically.
Banksy is more secure than web browser crypto.
While not actually cryptographic in nature, it's a nontrivial authentication protocol that is better than a more traditional certificate, as discussed in the article, and potentially very impressive end enlightening for the not too technically minded people who follow art and art trade.
Drug traffickers use the same technique as receipts for drug drops: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20484197
Circular reference detected
That always happens on HN. Someone linking to interesting content in threads is a common way for them to hit the front page later.
I'm missing something here.
Anyone can produce a torn-in-half "Di-faced" fake banknote with Lady Diana's face on it, with a handwritten ID number across the bill.
Hell, I'll validate your Banksy pieces for £64.
Where's the authenticity coming from, and whats even the point of the torn note?
It being pointless is the point. That is normally a fairly low-brow dismissal, so I will clarify that in this case I mean it as the straightforward reading of a piece of performance art. Banksy is an enormously successful commercial artist who has made a career out of mocking the notion that you can own art. The meaning of the piece is that the art is the authentication that you have the art, and that is the art, and if this all sounds a little twee well you’re not the kind of person who buys original Banksys.
The point of the torn note is (as far as I understood) that the authenticator keeps the other half. So anyone can contact the authenticator and ask them if they have a counterpiece for any given note.
I don't see how this prevents someone with visual access to the note and the painting from creating a fake though. (The article mentions the tear is hard to reproduce but I doubt that.)
Additionally I don't see how this prevents anyone from distributing a valid note with a fake or wrong painting.
They’d have o create a precisely matching tear.
Couldn't I sell a fake Banksy with the real authentication?
Yes but then you now have a real Banksy that will be labeled a fake because the fake print #18375 has a letter of authenticity while your real #18375 does not.
You would need to get Pest Control to keep issuing certificates for the same print, which they probably won't do.
This probably should be considered in the context of the work that shredded itself once the auction was completed. You'd think twice about having your expensive "Banksy" authenticated after the fact by sending it away to parts unknown.
There's always someone dumb enough in the art world or someone who wants the story and has far too much money.
I quite like Banksy, tbh, but overexposure is a thing.
Possibly not great for any artists maintaining anonymity/pseudo anonymity but...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fluids_in_art
Semen, due to the ability to sequence the DNA and difficulty obtaining a sample, is a fine genetic watermark.
the original meaning of 'symbol' meant this -- it was basically a ticket stub used to authenticate a document
(it only took on its modern meaning in a 16th century poem)
Somebody named Banksy using a bank of bank notes for authentication?
Sounds like a old joke with newfound currency to me.
Similar way of doing business as the drug cartels https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20484197
Neat way to protect authenticity especially within art