This isn’t new (from 2005), but I ran across it today and found it interesting. These dots can be used by law endorsement to tell what printer printed something and when. It’s designed to find counterfeiters, but I bet it will show up in trials for other things, too.
EFF: DocuColor Tracking Dot Decoding Guide
This guide is part of the Machine Identification Code Technology project. It explains how to read the date, time, and printer serial number from forensic tracking codes in a Xerox DocuColor color laser printout. This information is the result of research by Robert Lee, Seth Schoen, Patrick Murphy, Joel Alwen, and Andrew “bunnie” Huang. We acknowledge the assistance of EFF supporters who have contributed sample printouts to give us material to study. We are still looking for help in this research; we are asking the public to submit test sheets or join the printers mailing list to participate in our reverse engineering efforts.
The DocuColor series prints a rectangular grid of 15 by 8 miniscule yellow dots on every color page. The same grid is printed repeatedly over the entire page, but the repetitions of the grid are offset slightly from one another so that each grid is separated from the others. The grid is printed parallel to the edges of the page, and the offset of the grid from the edges of the page seems to vary. These dots encode up to 14 7-bit bytes of tracking information, plus row and column parity for error correction. Typically, about four of these bytes were unused (depending on printer model), giving 10 bytes of useful data. Below, we explain how to extract serial number, date, and time from these dots. Following the explanation, we implement the decoding process in an interactive computer program.
Here’s an article from 2005 about the research.
I understand law enforcement asking manufacturers to do this, but why do they always readily comply? Is there a precedent, law, etc. that explains manufacturers compliance?
Hmm, Big Brother is everywhere…
law “endorsement”?
I LOVE the term “law endorsement”. It’s not actually administering it, or upholding it…just giving in the nod. You hit the nail on the head for what really happens, but is mistakenly called law enforcement.
Excellent!
#1 Do you think that the manufacturers might just like selling things to the US and other governments?
Now that the cat’s out of the bag, yes, a serial killer was caught because he used a printer that only five other people had access to, to print a brag letter. Only one of the users had been near the sites of all the murders. He was too smart for them, but they were more sneaky than him.
The police checked his trail for evidence to nail him with, all the way to sacking his house. In the trial they gave credit to detective work, hoping to keep this coding a secret long enough to catch others.