DIGITAL FORGERY AND HOW TO HANDLE IT CORRECTLY

We now live in the digital age. Digital technology has evolved over the last decade to become the dominant technology for producing, processing, transferring, and storing information, knowledge, and intellectual assets. Information is a type of knowledge that may be expressed and developed in several dimensions, such as audio, video, text, and picture. Digital technology has made it simple and practical to digitise any and all forms of information, including knowledge and intellectual assets.

Digital technology is unquestionably better than previous conventional technology, and it offers several benefits such as simple access, searching, modification, and transmission. Recent breakthroughs in software development, such as plug-and-play(run) tools for capturing, processing, accessing, and transmitting digital data, have made it simple to modify data without leaving any visible signs of tampering.

Forgeries are not a new problem for humanity, but they are a very ancient one. It used to be restricted to art and literature, with little impact on the common people.

What is Digital Forgery?

Forgery is defined as the production of a document that is known to be fake but appears to be genuine. It is most commonly used in the context of affixing someone else’s signature to a document. Crooks can easily make fakes of cheques, currency, passports, visas, birth certificates, ID cards, and other documents using digital technology. Desktop publishing systems, colour laser and ink-jet printers, colour copiers, and images canners enable crooks to make fakes of cheques, currency, passports, visas, birth certificates, ID cards, and other documents using digital technology.

It is simple to falsify a document using advanced computing technologies. Document forgers are highly adept, and advances in technology have only made their job easier. Ordinary people are unfamiliar with all of the characteristics and distinctive indicators that distinguish a fake from a genuine item. It’s impossible to tell the difference between genuine and falsified documents unless you’ve been trained to do so. Forgeries are dangerous because they are frequently difficult to spot as fakes. As a result of digital forgeries, the victims of these activities may suffer financial loss as well as a loss of reputation.

Problems

The topic of digital forgeries study is still in its early stages. Many new and interesting technical issues with major societal implications are being uncovered. Many practical and specialized strategies and solutions have also been presented. The field of digital forensics research is finally focusing on tackling more generic problems. As a result, it appears that generic solutions and strategies, such as the creation of standardized data sets, benchmarks, and assessment criteria, will be presented in order to achieve the new frameworks while reducing the risk of digital forgeries

The originality and validity of financial, legal, and medical pictures and data, as well as other high-value assets, is critical. In many circumstances, determining the originality and validity of a picture or data is a difficult task. The advancement of computer graphics, animation, and multimedia, in combination with high-performance computing equipment and algorithms, adds to the issue’s complexity. Any event may have high-precision realistic photos and data generated. Identifying and distinguishing data and images captured by acquisition devices from realistic computer-generated data and images are a multifaceted topic that has attracted the attention of scholars all over the world.

The problem of authenticity of digital resources is worsened by the high-speed accessibility of the internet and the easy availability of freely available high-processing digital editing tools (image). The technology of digital resources is moving at a much faster rate due to social networking sites, making it very difficult to find the source of the resources. As a result, tracing the history (flow) of digital materials becomes a major challenge. In a networked context, certain efforts are being made to determine the linage (flow) of data, but to our knowledge, no one has attempted to locate the linage of digital resources. Researchers have not yet identified this as a possible issue with digital materials. The pursuit of answers leads to the resolution of today’s most pressing issues with the genuineness of intellectual property.

Solutions

There are several approaches and instruments available today for detecting forgeries. Apart from standard procedures like ocular analysis of a picture and parameter adjustment (such as brightness, contrast, and so on), the forensic community employs the following:

(i) reflections and shadows,

(ii) lighting,

(iii) analysis of thumbnails,

(iv) error level analysis (ELA),

(v) examination of brightness gradients,

(vi) principal component analysis (PCA),

(vii) clone detection,

(viii) stamp investigation of chromatic aberrations,

(ix) noise analysis.

There are several approaches like file structure analysis, metadata analysis, and others that are more commonly utilized for detecting picture or video creation processes, but not for forgery detection. Although signs of an image editor in the file’s information are clearly suspicious, alterations in the metadata or a quantization index discrepancy cannot be used as proof of fabrication (excluding evident repeating quantization).

Even without detecting methods for a picture or video creation, the number of methods supplied is rather extensive. The problem is that different techniques of image encoding and the variety of alterations that may be applied to digital pictures alter the features of the image that are available for forensic inspection in different ways. For example, the ELA approach can only be used with JPEG images; looking for cloned sections won’t help you identify a single insertion or hand retouch; shadows analysis won’t help you with photos taken in overcast weather; and so on.

As a result, it’s critical for examiners to grasp the reasons for picture forgeries, as well as the tools available for detecting the sort of change and ways for detecting it.

Forgery under Indian Law

The provisions of the IPC in respect to forgery were updated by Section 91 of the IT Act (read with the Second Schedule) to embrace electronic records as well. The Indian Penal Code has been amended to include Section 29A, which defines electronic records. The terms “electronic record” and “electronic record” will have the same meaning as in section 2(1)(t)2 of the IT Act.

Section 464 of the IPC was amended by section 91 of the IT Act to include a false electronic record. Under section 464, a person is said to make a false electronic record:

(i) Who dishonestly or fraudulently makes or transmits any electronic record or part of any electronic record, or, affixes any digital signature on any the electronic record, or, makes any mark denoting the authenticity of the digital signature, with the intention of causing it to be believed that such electronic record or part of an electronic record or digital signature was made, executed, transmitted, or affixed by or by the authority of a person by whom or by whose authority he knows that it was not made, executed or affixed; or

(ii) Who, without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or otherwise, alters an electronic record in any material part thereof, after it has been made, executed, or affixed with a digital signature either by himself or by any other person, whether such person be living or dead at the time of such alteration; or

(iii) Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, execute or alter an electronic record or to affix his digital signature on any electronic record knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or that by reason of deception practiced upon him, he does not know the contents of the electronic record or the nature of the alteration.

Explanation 3 to section 464 has also been added, which states that the term “affixing digital signature” has the same meaning as it does in section 2(1)(d)3 of the IT Act for the purposes of this section.

Section 463 of the IPC, after amendment, defines forgery, in relation to electronic records, as the making of any false electronic record or part thereof with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed.

Section 466 (forgery of record of Court or of Public register, etc.), section 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), section 469 (forger for purpose of harming reputation), section 470 (forged document or electronic record), section 471 (using as genuine a forged document),section474 (having possession of the document described in section 466 or 467, knowing it to be forged and intending to use it as genuine) and section 476 (counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents other than those described in section 467, or possessing counterfeit marked material) have also been suitably amended to include electronic records.

It should be noted, however, that section 467, which deals with forgery of valuable securities, wills, and other documents, has not been amended because section 1(4) prohibits the IT Act from being applied to certain documents such as a will, trust, power of attorney, contract for sale or conveyance of immovable property, and so on. As a result of the IT Act’s modifications, digital forgery and offences linked to it are now covered under the IPC.

Conclusion

As the cases of digital forgery rises the people will become more aware and cautious before entering into a venture pertaining to technology such as digital art, software. People will become wary of the digital signatures and other forms of digital material. The complexity of the forgery will become more intricate and the current detection methods will be futile. Advanced forgery detection software and tools need to be developed in order to counter such intricate forgeries. The increasing amount of forgeries will also give rise to research in the area of digital forgeries among the digital communities. The authenticity of any digital material will consequently decrease at face value and will only be accepted as genuine after a thorough examination by a professional.