HUNTER™ / Digital-media provenance
ORIGIN™
ORIGIN moves students past “does this look fake?” to the harder question: what can we prove about where this evidence came from? Students compare photographs, screenshots, video frames, crops, alterations and reposts across devices and sources.
TRAINING SIMULATIONLead agent: THE ORIGIN SPECIALISTObserve. Compare. Corroborate. Prove.
TRAINING SIMULATION — this instrument teaches the method and the interface. Production capability is not connected, and nothing here should be presented as a technical result.
IMG-01
IMG-02
IMG-03
IMG-04
- · capture context
- · device family
- · compression history
- · crop geometry
- · repost path
- POSSIBLE COMMON ORIGIN — IMG-02 / IMG-03 · not yet proven
Observe. Compare. Corroborate. Prove.
What it teaches
Visual suspicion is not evidentiary proof.
Observe. Compare. Corroborate. Prove.
Inside the instrument
- Source consistency assessment
- Capture-context comparison
- Crop, alteration and repost tracing
- Cross-artifact common-origin assessment
- Provenance gap documentation
Questions it will put to you
- “What is the claimed origin, and is it consistent with the artifact?”
- “Do these two artifacts plausibly share provenance?”
- “What would you need to prove it, not merely suspect it?”
Practicum
ACTIVEDeepfake / Origin Practicum
- Scenario
- Media of contested authenticity across several devices.
- You must prove
- Separate visual suspicion from evidentiary proof.
- You leave with
- Provenance assessment language that does not overstate.