REVIEW 2 cited by
Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AI
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Artists are increasingly concerned about advancements in image generation models that can closely replicate their unique artistic styles. In response, several protection tools against style mimicry have been developed that incorporate small adversarial perturbations into artworks published online. In this work, we evaluate the effectiveness of popular protections -- with millions of downloads -- and show they only provide a false sense of security. We find that low-effort and "off-the-shelf" techniques, such as image upscaling, are sufficient to create robust mimicry methods that significantly degrade existing protections. Through a user study, we demonstrate that all existing protections can be easily bypassed, leaving artists vulnerable to style mimicry. We caution that tools based on adversarial perturbations cannot reliably protect artists from the misuse of generative AI, and urge the development of alternative non-technological solutions.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Anti-Tamper Protection for Unauthorized Individual Image Generation
ATP embeds a fragile authorization message in the frequency domain of a protected photo so that any purification attempt corrupts the message and triggers rejection by the generation service.
-
Is Perturbation-Based Image Protection Disruptive to Image Editing?
Perturbation-based protections do not reliably block diffusion editing, and in many cases they increase the edited image's alignment with the guidance prompt.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.