An Expert Review of Deepfake and Video Forensics
1. Introduction: The Rise of Synthetic Deception
The proliferation of deepfakes represents a watershed moment in digital media, challenging the very notion of what constitutes authentic content. A deepfake is defined as AI-generated or manipulated media—including images, audio, and video—that is engineered to appear truthful and authentic, often resembling existing individuals, objects, or events.1 The scope of this threat extends far beyond the more commonly discussed videos to encompass deepfake images, such as the fabricated Pentagon explosion that briefly disrupted the U.S. stock market, and audio, exemplified by the convincing Joe Biden robocall that targeted voters.1 The emergence of deepfakes is driven not merely by technological advancement but by the increasing accessibility of user-friendly, open-source tools that enable even individuals with basic technical skills to generate sophisticated forgeries.6
In response to this escalating threat, the discipline of deepfake forensics has emerged as a crucial countermeasure. This field is a multifaceted, multi-layered investigative process that is far more comprehensive than simple deepfake detection.2 While deepfake detection tools often provide a simple "yes/no" classification based on an AI model's assessment, deepfake forensics is a holistic process dedicated to gathering and interpreting multiple types of forensic evidence to determine how, where, and why a media file was manipulated.2 The primary goal is not just to classify content but to support legal and investigative decisions by generating findings that are reproducible, explainable, and can withstand judicial scrutiny.2
The current landscape is best characterized as a dynamic and adversarial "deepfake arms race".9 In this constant struggle, advancements in deepfake generation technology are met with new forensic countermeasures, creating a perpetual cycle of innovation and adaptation. This report explores this ongoing contest by examining the core technologies used to create deepfakes, the subtle digital fingerprints they leave behind, the forensic tools employed to identify them, and the profound societal, legal, and ethical challenges that have arisen as a result. The distinction between deepfake detection and deepfake forensics is paramount, as it signals a fundamental shift in purpose from a technical classification to a legally defensible discipline. A simple confidence score from a "black box" AI tool is insufficient for a courtroom, where the legal system demands transparency, reproducibility, and a clear chain of custody.2 This evolution from a technical task to an investigative discipline is the central theme of this analysis.
2. A Technical Foundation: The Generation of Deepfakes
The foundational technology of deepfake creation has evolved rapidly, with each new generation of generative AI models pushing the boundaries of realism. The journey began with Autoencoders, a type of neural network designed to compress data. Early deepfakes were often created using two such autoencoders: one trained on a source face and another on a target face.14 The process involved training each autoencoder to compress images of a face into a tiny, abstract numerical representation and then decompress it back to the original as accurately as possible.14 To perform a face swap, the compressed representation from the source face was fed into the decoder of the target face's network, which then reconstructed the image using the facial features of the target.14 This technique, while effective, often left noticeable artifacts.
The first major technological revolution arrived with Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), which significantly improved the realism of synthesized media.16 A GAN framework consists of two competing neural networks: a generator and a discriminator.16 The generator's role is to create new, synthetic images, while the discriminator's role is to evaluate whether the images it receives are real or fake.16 This iterative, competitive process, described as a min-max game, drives both networks to improve.19 The generator learns to create images that can deceive the discriminator, and the discriminator, in turn, learns to become more adept at identifying forgeries. This adversarial training mechanism is the reason GAN-generated deepfakes are so convincing and difficult to distinguish from genuine content.16
Today, the next frontier in deepfake generation is the advent of Diffusion Models (DMs), which are now beginning to surpass the quality of GANs.20 Unlike GANs' adversarial approach, DMs operate by adding noise to an image over many steps and then learning to reverse the denoising process to regenerate the data.22 The key advantages of diffusion models include their capacity for producing hyper-realistic outputs that often exceed GANs in realism and diversity.22 They also offer a more reliable and stable training process, avoiding the "mode collapse" issue that can plague GANs.22 However, this enhanced quality comes at a high cost, as DMs are significantly more computationally intensive for both training and generation.17
The evolution from autoencoders to GANs to diffusion models is not merely a technical timeline; it is the fundamental engine driving the deepfake arms race. With each new generation of models, the artifacts become more subtle, and the fakes become more convincing, directly necessitating more sophisticated and resource-intensive detection methods. A forensic tool designed to spot the crude artifacts of an early autoencoder deepfake will likely fail when confronted with the hyper-realistic output of a modern diffusion model.10 This constant technological leapfrog underscores why the battle against synthetic media is a continuous, dynamic challenge.
3. Forensic Identification: Tracing the Digital Fingerprints
Deepfake technology, despite its sophistication, often leaves behind subtle but detectable artifacts that act as digital fingerprints of the generative process. These flaws, which are largely imperceptible to the human eye, become the primary targets for forensic analysis. One of the most common categories of these artifacts lies in biometric inconsistencies. Generative models frequently fail to replicate the nuances of human biology and physiology with complete accuracy.23 This can manifest as unnatural eye blinking, where a person in a deepfake video may not blink at all, or a lack of synchronization between lip movements and the accompanying audio.1 More advanced biometric systems can also detect the absence of natural cues such as pupil dilation, skin texture, and subtle variations in skin color caused by blood flow, which current deepfake technology struggles to mimic in real-time.21
Beyond biometric cues, deepfakes leave traces at the pixel and compression level. The process of splicing a synthesized face onto an original image can introduce irregularities that betray the forgery.26 Forensic tools can spot inconsistencies such as unnatural lighting, mismatched shadows that do not align with the environment, and abnormal skin textures.2 Furthermore, digital files that have been manipulated often show signs of re-saving or compression, which can be revealed by tools that analyze the frequency domain, such as the Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT) plot.2 These artifacts are a direct result of the generative process, which disrupts the natural texture and consistency of the original image, leaving behind irregularities that can be detected by specialized algorithms.26
A more sophisticated approach involves multi-modal and frequency analysis. Many deepfake videos involve complex manipulations of both the visual and auditory streams, and a simple aural-visual mismatch, such as a lip-sync discrepancy, can be a tell-tale sign of a forgery.1 Hybrid forensic methods combine deep learning models like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), which are adept at extracting spatial features from images, with Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), which excel at analyzing temporal features in videos.27 This combination of spatial and temporal analysis, often coupled with frequency-based techniques, allows for a more comprehensive and robust evaluation that can capture both subtle irregularities in a single frame and unnatural motion across a video sequence.27
The forensic detection of these artifacts is a constant battle to stay ahead of the technology curve. The inherent digital fingerprints left by generative models are not random flaws; they are the very evidence that forensic investigators seek to uncover. However, deepfake creators are also in a race to make these artifacts less and less detectable.9 A key challenge arises when a deepfake is subjected to common post-processing techniques, such as resizing, cropping, or social media compression.10 These operations can significantly degrade the performance of deepfake detectors, meaning that a tool that works flawlessly in a controlled lab environment may fail completely on real-world, social media-circulated content.10 This highlights a fundamental challenge in the arms race: the forensic defense must not only find the artifacts but also be robust enough to detect them after they have been obscured by common digital operations.
4. The Deepfake Forensics Toolkit: Methodologies and Countermeasures
The battle against deepfakes requires a multi-layered toolkit that combines both AI-powered and traditional forensic methodologies. AI-powered detection models are at the forefront of this effort. These models, often based on deep learning architectures, are trained to spot the unique inconsistencies left by deepfake generators.17 Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are employed to analyze spatial features and pixel-level irregularities in images and video frames 13, while Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) are used to capture temporal inconsistencies and motion anomalies across a video sequence, such as unnatural eye movements or stiff facial expressions.28 Specialized tools like Intel's FakeCatcher and Microsoft's Video Authenticator leverage these techniques to provide real-time analysis and authenticity scores.21
However, traditional forensic techniques remain an indispensable part of the deepfake forensics process. These methods, which predate the term "deepfake," include a comprehensive analysis of file metadata to trace its origin and history, as well as an examination of the file's internal structure for signs of tampering.1 A reverse image search can also be a valuable tool to find the original source of a manipulated image or video.2 The continued importance of these non-AI methods stems from their explainable and reproducible nature. Unlike "black box" AI detectors that can be difficult to interpret, traditional forensics relies on mathematical models and established principles of physics that can be clearly articulated and defended in a court of law.2 By combining AI tools for rapid triage and traditional methods for building a stronger evidentiary base, investigators can create a powerful, synergistic defense.2
Beyond reactive detection, proactive and preventative countermeasures are also emerging. Blockchain and watermarking technologies are being explored as a means to authenticate media at its source.4 Blockchain can provide a decentralized, tamper-proof record of content provenance by cryptographically hashing the original media.4 Any subsequent modification to the content would change its cryptographic hash, immediately alerting users to a forgery.31 Similarly, digital watermarking embeds invisible digital fingerprints or identifiers into media, allowing detection tools to quickly identify whether the content was created or modified by AI.7 These digital fingerprints do not alter the appearance of the media but provide a non-removable signal of its authenticity.
A highly effective defense against deepfakes, particularly in identity verification scenarios, is biometric-based detection. Systems like those offered by Facia employ "liveness detection," which moves beyond simple face matching to analyze subtle, real-time biological cues that deepfakes cannot convincingly replicate.23 This includes analyzing skin texture, blood flow patterns beneath the skin, and 3D depth information to ensure that a real human face is presented, not a flat image or video on a screen.23 This multi-layered approach to identity verification provides a robust shield against sophisticated "presentation attacks" where a deepfake is presented to a camera to deceive an authentication system.24
There is a critical tension between the speed and power of AI-based detection and the legal system's need for transparency and explainability. While AI can process vast amounts of data quickly, its "black box" nature has made its findings difficult to admit as evidence in court.2 Conversely, traditional forensics is explainable but may be too slow to combat the rapid spread of deepfakes.2 The ultimate solution is a hybrid, multi-layered approach that bridges this gap. AI can be used for rapid, large-scale screening and triaging, while traditional and explainable methods can be used to build a legally sound case on the specific artifacts identified. This powerful, synergistic defense is essential for deepfake forensics to be effective in both a technical and legal capacity.
5. Societal Impact: Case Studies in Misinformation and Fraud
The proliferation of deepfakes has transitioned from a theoretical threat to a demonstrated danger with far-reaching societal consequences. The most immediate and profound impact has been on the political landscape and the integrity of democratic processes. Notable incidents include the deepfake video of Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which falsely showed him telling his citizens to surrender to Russian forces.1 Similarly, a convincing AI-generated robocall featuring President Joe Biden's voice instructed voters to "stay home and save your vote," constituting a form of electoral sabotage.5 In Slovakia, deepfake audio recordings were released just days before a national election, falsely implicating a political leader in election rigging and other misdeeds.3 These cases illustrate how deepfakes can manipulate public opinion, undermine elections, and erode fundamental trust in political figures and institutions.6
The financial risks are equally significant. Deepfakes have been used in a series of high-profile fraud cases, with NIST data projecting that AI-assisted fraud could lead to global losses of $1 trillion by 2024.36 In one case, scammers used a voice deepfake to impersonate a company's chief financial officer, instructing an employee to transfer $35 million for a fake corporate acquisition.5 Another scam involved a convincing deepfake of Elon Musk used in a fraudulent investment pitch that mimicked CNBC's branding, resulting in millions of dollars being siphoned from investors.5 These incidents demonstrate that deepfakes are not just targeting individuals but can also compromise corporate boardrooms and financial systems.9
Perhaps the most insidious consequence is the systemic erosion of public trust. The widespread dissemination of fabricated content has created a cognitive phenomenon known as "Impostor Bias," which reflects a growing skepticism toward the authenticity of all multimedia.19 This bias is a direct threat to the legal system, which has long operated on the assumption that "the video doesn't lie".35 With deepfakes, genuine digital evidence can be retroactively challenged as fake, a tactic criminals can use to create plausible deniability.35 The fabricated Pentagon explosion image serves as a powerful case study, demonstrating how a single convincing fake can go viral, be amplified by trusted accounts, and cause real-world consequences like a brief dip in the stock market.5 The logical progression of this trend is a compromised legal system and the potential for social unrest fueled by fabricated media featuring law enforcement incidents.35
Celebrities and social media influencers are also frequent targets of deepfake exploitation. The Taylor Swift deepfake scandal and the Rashmika Mandanna incident highlight how malicious actors can use deepfakes to create non-consensual explicit content or impersonate public figures for commercial scams.5 The Molly-Mae Hague case further illustrates this, where a deepfake video was used to promote a fake perfume, tricking thousands of her fans into financial loss by leveraging their trust in the influencer.37 While these malicious uses are highly concerning, deepfakes also have benign applications. They are used in the entertainment industry to de-age actors, create digital clones for films like
Star Wars, and even in humanitarian efforts, such as the documentary Welcome to Chechnya, which used deepfakes to protect the identities of interviewees.38 The dual-use nature of this technology underscores the ethical complexity of the deepfake challenge.9
6. The Legal and Ethical Imperative
The proliferation of deepfakes has thrust the legal system into a new and challenging era. A central legal hurdle is the "black box" problem of many AI-based detection tools.2 These systems, while powerful, often provide little to no information about how they arrive at a decision, making it difficult for an expert to stand in a courtroom and confidently state, "This media is fake because AI told me so".2 The legal system requires a clear, understandable, and reproducible chain of reasoning for evidence to be admissible.13 This has led to an urgent need for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) frameworks in digital forensics. XAI systems, by using techniques like SHAP and LIME, can provide human-readable explanations for an AI's output, thus bridging the gap between a complex algorithmic process and the legal criteria for evidence presentation.13 Furthermore, relying on a simple "confidence score" from an AI tool is considered unsuitable for judicial use, as these scores can be misleading.2
Beyond technical explainability, the procedural integrity of evidence is also paramount. For any digital evidence to be admissible in court, a clear and documented chain of custody is essential.2 The authenticity of the media, from its original capture to its presentation in court, must be verifiable and free from any unauthorized manipulation. This procedural requirement highlights that deepfake forensics is as much a legal and ethical discipline as it is a technical one, focusing on building a stronger evidentiary base rather than just a simple classification.2
The legal status of deepfakes is complex and varies by jurisdiction. In some places, their creation or distribution may be illegal under laws concerning defamation, fraud, or copyright.1 However, in other cases, deepfakes may be protected as a form of free speech or artistic expression, creating a difficult balancing act for policymakers and regulators.1 This complexity necessitates a tailored legal and regulatory response. Policymakers are exploring new laws specifically targeting the use of deepfakes in political campaigns, and some jurisdictions are mandating that AI-generated media be labeled as such.3
The ethical challenges are inextricably linked to the legal ones. The dual-use nature of deepfake technology—its capacity for both creative, benevolent applications and malicious, harmful ones—raises a fundamental ethical dilemma.9 Regulators must grapple with how to prevent malicious use without stifling artistic expression or technological innovation. Another critical ethical concern is the risk of bias in AI-based detection algorithms. These systems are trained on vast datasets, and if that data is unrepresentative or contains inherent biases, the resulting algorithm can produce skewed or unreliable results.2 This underscores the importance of developing robust, transparent, and ethically sound AI systems that not only speed up forensic investigations but also adhere to the highest standards of justice and fairness.
7. The Future of the Arms Race: Challenges and Directions
The relentless "deepfake arms race" presents a series of fundamental challenges that extend beyond the capabilities of current technology. A primary technical hurdle is the generalization and robustness problem.10 Many deepfake detectors perform well on media generated by known, familiar algorithms from their training datasets. However, they often struggle to generalize to "zero-day" or previously unseen fakes created by new generative models.10 This inability to generalize is a significant weakness, limiting the effectiveness of these tools in real-world scenarios where new deepfake techniques are constantly emerging. Furthermore, the issue of robustness complicates matters. Post-processing operations common on social media, such as video compression, cropping, or resizing, can significantly degrade the performance of deepfake detectors, effectively obscuring the very artifacts they are designed to find.10
In addition to these technical issues, significant computational and data challenges persist. The process of training state-of-the-art deepfake detection models is computationally demanding, requiring substantial resources that may be inaccessible to smaller organizations.17 Simultaneously, there is a scarcity of high-quality, diverse datasets containing both real and fake media, which are essential for training and validating effective detection systems.17 This data scarcity and computational complexity further exacerbates the difficulty of creating robust, generalized, and accessible forensic tools.
The solution to these challenges cannot be a single technological fix; it must be a holistic, multi-layered framework built on collaboration, policy, and education. No single method is sufficient to counter the evolving threat.2 A viable path forward involves international and multi-stakeholder collaboration between academic institutions, industry leaders, and governments to share data, develop new technologies, and establish a unified front against deepfakes.12 Policy efforts are already underway, such as the EU's AI Act, which mandates the labeling of AI-generated media to help users distinguish synthetic content from authentic media.21 Finally, media literacy is a crucial, non-technical defense. Educating the public on how to identify misinformation and understand the risks of deepfakes can empower individuals to become more discerning digital citizens, reducing the effectiveness of deepfake-based disinformation campaigns.12
The ultimate security against deepfakes will not be a single, perfect algorithm but rather a decentralized, distributed system that combines proactive measures like watermarking and content provenance with reactive forensic analysis and a concerted societal effort to foster media literacy and ethical standards. This is not a race that can be won with technology alone; it requires a collective investment in a more secure, trustworthy, and resilient digital future.
8. Conclusion: A Call to Action for a Trustworthy Digital Future
The emergence of deepfake technology poses a significant and multifaceted threat to the foundations of our digital society. As a powerful tool with the capacity to generate hyper-realistic, fabricated content, it has already been used to orchestrate political disinformation campaigns, execute sophisticated financial scams, and systematically erode public trust in all forms of digital media.5 The defining feature of this challenge is the ongoing "deepfake arms race," a continuous competition between the creators of synthetic media and the forensic experts tasked with identifying it.
In this struggle, the only viable defense is a comprehensive, multi-layered approach that moves beyond simple deepfake detection to a rigorous, legally sound discipline of deepfake forensics. This requires combining the speed and power of AI-based tools with the explainable and verifiable principles of traditional multimedia analysis.2 For forensic findings to have legal weight, they must be reproducible, transparent, and adhere to a strict chain of custody, a standard that a mere AI confidence score cannot meet.2
The road ahead is complex. The technical challenges of ensuring deepfake detectors can generalize to unseen fakes and remain robust against post-processing are immense. The legal and ethical dilemmas surrounding the dual-use nature of the technology and the need for explainable AI frameworks are equally daunting. However, the path to a more secure digital future is clear. It requires a holistic, collective effort built on international collaboration between academia, industry, and government.12 Proactive measures like blockchain-based content provenance and digital watermarking must be developed to authenticate media at its source, and policy must evolve to mandate accountability and transparency.21 Most importantly, a collective commitment to media literacy is required to empower individuals to critically evaluate the digital content they consume and share.21
The future of deepfake technology is not a battle to be won by a single perfect algorithm. It is a shared responsibility to build a resilient, multi-layered defense that combines robust technology with ethical standards and a digitally literate populace. By prioritizing this holistic approach, society can harness the creative potential of generative AI while mitigating its risks, ensuring that trust in our digital interactions is not a relic of the past but a cornerstone of our future.
Works cited
What are Deepfakes and How You Can Detect Them? - Spyscape, accessed September 7, 2025, https://spyscape.com/article/what-are-deepfakes-and-how-you-can-detect-them-we-asked-an-ai-tool
Deepfake Forensics Is Much More Than Deepfake Detection!, accessed September 7, 2025, https://blog.ampedsoftware.com/2025/08/05/deepfake-forensics
Regulating AI Deepfakes and Synthetic Media in the Political Arena, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/regulating-ai-deepfakes-and-synthetic-media-political-arena
Blockchain Technology for Combating Deepfake and Protect Video/Image Integrity, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357241420_Blockchain_Technology_for_Combating_Deepfake_and_Protect_VideoImage_Integrity
Top 10 Terrifying Deepfake Examples - Arya.ai, accessed September 7, 2025, https://arya.ai/blog/top-deepfake-incidents
Deepfakes and Democracy (Theory): How Synthetic Audio-Visual Media for Disinformation and Hate Speech Threaten Core Democratic Functions - PubMed Central, accessed September 7, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9453721/
Enhancing Deepfake Content Detection Through Blockchain Technology - The Science and Information (SAI) Organization, accessed September 7, 2025, https://thesai.org/Downloads/Volume16No6/Paper_7-Enhancing_Deepfake_Content_Detection.pdf
blog.ampedsoftware.com, accessed September 7, 2025, https://blog.ampedsoftware.com/2025/08/05/deepfake-forensics#:~:text=A%20Deepfake%20Is%20Just%20an%20Image,-We%20shouldn't&text=As%20such%2C%20they%20exploit%20the,%2C%20manipulation%2C%20or%20synthetic%20generation.
Inside the Deepfake Arms Race: Can Digital Forensics Investigators Keep Up? | HaystackID, accessed September 7, 2025, https://haystackid.com/inside-the-deepfake-arms-race-can-digital-forensics-investigators-keep-up/
Why Do Facial Deepfake Detectors Fail? — Related Work, accessed September 7, 2025, https://deepfake-total.com/related_work/2302.13156
Why Do Facial Deepfake Detectors Fail? | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373635426_Why_Do_Facial_Deepfake_Detectors_Fail
Tackling the DeepFake Detection Challenge - University at Albany, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.albany.edu/cnse/news/2019-tackling-deepfake-detection-challenge
(PDF) Developing an Explainable AI System for Digital Forensics: Enhancing Trust and Transparency in Flagging Events for Legal Evidence - ResearchGate, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394666181_Developing_an_Explainable_AI_System_for_Digital_Forensics_Enhancing_Trust_and_Transparency_in_Flagging_Events_for_Legal_Evidence
The central technique used in DeepFakes is fascinating. Initially I assumed they... | Hacker News, accessed September 7, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21803833
What are deepfakes? - TechTalks, accessed September 7, 2025, https://bdtechtalks.com/2020/09/04/what-is-deepfake/
Deepfake (Generative adversarial network) - CVisionLab, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.cvisionlab.com/cases/deepfake-gan/
Deepfake Detection Using GANs - Meegle, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.meegle.com/en_us/topics/deepfake-detection/deepfake-detection-using-gans
The Emergence of Deepfake Technology: A Review | TIM Review, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.timreview.ca/article/1282
Deepfake Media Forensics: Status and Future Challenges - MDPI, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2313-433X/11/3/73
GANs vs. Diffusion Models: In-Depth Comparison and Analysis - Sapien, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.sapien.io/blog/gans-vs-diffusion-models-a-comparative-analysis
Deepfakes and the future of digital security: Are we ready? - ET Edge Insights, accessed September 7, 2025, https://etedge-insights.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/deepfakes-and-the-future-of-digital-security-are-we-ready/
GANs vs. Diffusion Models: Putting AI to the test | Aurora Solar, accessed September 7, 2025, https://aurorasolar.com/blog/putting-ai-to-the-test-generative-adversarial-networks-vs-diffusion-models/
A Comprehensive Look at Deepfake Detection Techniques - Facia.ai, accessed September 7, 2025, https://facia.ai/blog/deepfake-detection-techniques/
Deepfake Detection & ID Fraud Protection - GBG, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.gbg.com/en/blog/deepfake-detection-id-fraud-protection/
Forensics and Analysis of Deepfake Videos - Semantic Scholar, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Forensics-and-Analysis-of-Deepfake-Videos-Jafar-Ababneh/1192554856d9eca4f5eabe99ca1f9e6fdb340d2e
Deepfake Media Forensics: State of the Art and Challenges Ahead - arXiv, accessed September 7, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2408.00388v1
Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Evolving Challenge of Deepfake Detection: A Systematic Analysis - MDPI, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2224-2708/14/1/17
Deepfake Image Forensics for Privacy Protection and Authenticity ..., accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/16/4/270
Developing an Explainable AI System for Digital Forensics: Enhancing Trust and Transparency in Flagging Events for Legal Evidence, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.forensicscijournal.com/articles/jfsr-aid1089.php
Deepfake Detection In AI Ethics - Meegle, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.meegle.com/en_us/topics/deepfake-detection/deepfake-detection-in-ai-ethics
Decentralizing video copyright protection: a novel blockchain-enabled framework with performance evaluation - PMC, accessed September 7, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12399541/
How it works - Content Authenticity Initiative, accessed September 7, 2025, https://contentauthenticity.org/how-it-works
Secure Watermarking Schemes and Their Approaches in the IoT Technology: An Overview, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/14/1744
Types and Importance of Digital Watermarking - InstaSafe, accessed September 7, 2025, https://instasafe.com/blog/digital-watermarking-and-its-types/
How deepfakes will challenge the future of digital evidence in law ..., accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.police1.com/investigations/how-deepfakes-will-challenge-the-future-of-digital-evidence-in-law-enforcement
Guardians of Forensic Evidence: Evaluating Analytic Systems ..., accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.nist.gov/publications/guardians-forensic-evidence-evaluating-analytic-systems-against-ai-generated-deepfakes
Top 5 Deepfake Incidents You Must Know - Facia.ai, accessed September 7, 2025, https://facia.ai/blog/top-5-deepfake-incidents-you-must-know/
Deepfake - Wikipedia, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepfake
4 ways to future-proof against deepfakes in 2024 and beyond ..., accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/02/4-ways-to-future-proof-against-deepfakes-in-2024-and-beyond/
A Robust Approach to Multimodal Deepfake Detection - PMC, accessed September 7, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10299653/
Comments
Post a Comment