[grues-dinner]

With a bit (OK quite a lot) of fiddling, you could probably remove the CCD and feed the analog data into the controller, unless that's also got a crypto system in it.

Presumably if you were discovered you would then "burn" the device as its local key would be known then to be used by bad actors, but now you need to be checking all photos against a blacklist. Which also means if you buy a second hand device, you might be buying a device with "untrusted" output.

[salawat]

Any problem that requires cryptographic attestation or technical control of all endpoints is not a solution we should be pursuing. Think of it as a tainted primitive. Not to be implemented.

The problem of Trust is a human problem, and throwing technology at it just makes it worse.

[grues-dinner]

I'm absolutely in agreement with that. The appetite for technical solutions to social problems seems utterly endless.

This particular idea has so many glaring problems that one might almost wonder if the motivation is less about "preventing misinformation" or "protecting democracy" or "thinking of the children" or whatever, and more about making it easier to prove you took the photo as you sue someone for using it without permission. But any technology promoted by Adobe couldn't be about DRM, so that's just crazy talk!