|
我現(xiàn)在心情很無奈，因為今天是2014年的愚人節(jié),，我很猶豫是不是應該在這一天發(fā)表文章，因為在這一天所發(fā)表的文章,，可信度和公信力是要大打折扣的,，沒有幾個人愿意相信我那可憐的“玩笑”。但是我還是決定盡快將文章發(fā)表,，因為本篇文章早一天發(fā)表,，或許就能挽救上百條人命和家庭……
本人丁澤宇的一個社交網(wǎng)站好友，在昨天晚上（2014年3月31日星期一）分享了一個外國自由職業(yè)新聞記者網(wǎng)站的文章：
以下是這篇文章的鏈接：
http://www./phillipwood.html
新聞發(fā)布者：Jim Stone
職業(yè)：自由職業(yè)記者
以下是這篇文章部分段落的翻譯：
“從被劫持的370航班中帶走的IBM工程師發(fā)了一張自拍照到網(wǎng)上
這張似乎是全黑的圖片,，是由IBM工程師飛利浦·伍德,，于2014年3月18日，在一個小黑屋中用iphone
5拍攝,，并發(fā)表到外國圖片網(wǎng)站“4chan”上面的,。請把這張圖片保存到你的桌面上，右鍵點擊它,。選擇“屬性”——>“摘要”——>“高級”,。就可以看到“可交換圖像文件信息（EXIF）”?；蛘?，把這張圖片保存到你的手機里，然后打開這張圖片的“選項”——>“詳細信息”
也可以看到“可交換圖像文件信息（EXIF）”,。那些說我沒有把EXIF發(fā)出來的美分們,，那些向公眾說他們被愚弄了的美分們,。沒有什么能夠比這個更加有圖有真相了。那就是為什么我發(fā)出了這張原圖,。這張圖片之所以看起來如此高端黑,，是因為關押飛利浦的牢房太昏暗了。但是一個關鍵信息卻牢牢地嵌在可交換圖像文件信息（EXIF）中,，那就是這張照片的拍攝地——迭戈加西亞島的坐標。請把這張黑圖片保存到你安裝有谷歌地圖的手機里,，然后打開這張圖片的“選項”——>“顯示在地圖上”,，那么你恐怕將會有驚人地發(fā)現(xiàn)。而這并不是惡作劇,。這張圖片拍攝時所記錄的位置坐標,，與谷歌官方地圖中迭戈加西亞島的坐標有3英里的誤差。那并不是谷歌實際所呈現(xiàn)的,，那里離迭戈加西亞島有幾英里的誤差,，所以沒有人用谷歌搜索這個，因此對這個誤差本身的調查就變得有趣了,。我不知道這個所謂的迭戈加西亞到到底有多大,，但是如果島上有跑道的話……呵呵，那么一切可就都對上號了……
與照片一同發(fā)布的是以下這段文字：“當我所在的航班被劫持之后,，我被未知的軍事人員扣為人質（戴著頭套）,。我為IBM工作，并且在劫機發(fā)生時,，我設法將我的手機藏在了我的屁股里,。他們把我和其余的乘客隔離開來，并且我現(xiàn)在在一個牢房里,。我的名字叫飛利浦·伍德,。我想我被下了藥并且無法清醒的思考?！?/span>
那些網(wǎng)絡特工和水軍們正在說IBM從來就沒有一個叫做飛利浦·伍德的員工,。但是他在社交網(wǎng)站“領英”上的資料卻使這些謊言不攻自破：
/pub/philip-wood/3/a46/4a9
可交換圖像文件信息（EXIF）無法用普通軟件篡改而不留痕跡，所有軟件都會在修改完可交換圖像文件信息（EXIF）后,，在應用選項卡上留下修改日志,，告知用戶圖片被軟件修改過了?？山粨Q圖像文件信息（EXIF）同樣也可以被刪除,，但是絕對不可能被不留痕跡的修改。照片中的EXIF是嵌入式的,，未經(jīng)修改的EXIF直接可以拿到法庭上當證據(jù)使用,。假如說飛利浦的這張照片是被美國中央情報局或者一位頂級黑客所捏造的,，那我才會說這可能是真的呢，盡管我對此更表示懷疑,?！?/span>
翻譯部分到此為止，以下是本人丁澤宇將這張照片代入到我的電腦和手機,，并用谷歌地圖進行推導所得出來的結果：
 
——6架P8波塞冬海上巡邏機,，加上7架B52轟炸機，還有另外兩架B52已經(jīng)起飛,，戰(zhàn)斗機數(shù)量不明,，本人丁澤宇并不認為暴力營救是一個明智的做法……
——可憐的飛利浦就被關在這里
以下是那篇爆料的原文：
BLOCKBUSTER: HIJACKED IBM ENGINEER
PHILIP WOOD SUCCESSFULLY DIALED OUT OF DIEGO GARCIA
The story below is NOW CONFIRMED.
ALL THE DEBUNK ATTEMPTS ARE THIN AT BEST. I AM NOT GOING TO LET
THIS ENGINEER SIT THERE AND BE DRUGGED ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE
PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE A FEW SHILLS TRIED TO RIP THIS. DEBUNK ATTEMPTS
ALL ANSWERED BELOW ORIGINAL POST AND ORIGINAL SOURCE EXPLAINED AND
LINKED. I STATE ALL THROUGH THE ARTICLE THAT A REALLY GOOD HACKER
COULD FAKE THIS, AND THE REASONS WHY I BELIEVE THAT TO NOT BE THE
CASE. FROM THERE YOU CAN TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.
UPDATE: A retinex (absolute bit
rendering) of the image sure looks like he is sitting there with a
black bag over his head, just like the army does it. Ultimately a
100 percent answer to this cannot be obtained absent busting in
there like Rambo.
ORIGINAL POST:
The
blindfold:
Philip claimed to be blindfolded
when he sent the message. When the American military blindfolds
someone, it is accomplished by putting a bag over the head that is
locked so you can't get it off. This left the engineers hands free.
This would have made it possible for him to pull his Iphone 5 (a
fact confirmed by the Exif data) out of his butt as stated, and use
the voice command ability of the Iphone to just talk to it to log
in and post the message. This explains why he sent a black photo,
he could not see what he was sending, he just knew he snapped a
photo and sent whatever got taken.
The
coordinates:When the coordinates are added to the fact
that the photo's exif data does not match the Google coordinates or
any other coordinates for Diego Garcia that are posted
online, but is still
within the boundaries of Diego Garcia, it
proves that no one just pulled those coordinates off the web. It
helps confirm that this was not just a hoax because the coordinates
are exact to wherever on Diego Garcia the Iphone was when it took
the photo.
ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS:
IBM ENGINEER TAKEN FROM HIJACKED
FLIGHT 370 GOT A SELFIE OUT TO THE INTERNET.
This image, which appears black was
posted as taken in a dark cell by IBM engineer Philip Wood. SAVE IT
TO YOUR DESKTOP. RIGHT CLICK IT. SELECT PROPERTIES. CLICK DETAILS,
THAT REVEALS THE EXIF. Shills are saying I did not post the Exif.
Shills pray for people to be stupid. NOTHING PROVES IT BETTER THAN
THE ACTUAL IMAGE. THAT IS WHY I POSTED THE ACTUAL IMAGE. The
picture is black because the cell was too dark,
but a critical piece of
information was embedded in the Exif data, the coordinates to Diego
Garcia, where the picture was taken. And it's real, this is NOT a
hoax. The coordinates in the picture indicate that the photo was
taken within 3 miles of what Google officially gives for Diego
Garcia. It is NOT EXACTLY what comes up
on Google. It is off a couple miles, so NO ONE GOOGLED THIS, thus
helping to confirm it's authenticity. I don't know how big the
island is, but if it has a runway, that certainly fits.
The picture posted with the
following text: "I have been held hostage by unknown military
personal after my flight was hijacked (blindfolded). I work for IBM
and I have managed to hide my cellphone in my ass during the
hijack. I have been separated from the rest of the passengers and I
am in a cell. My name is Philip Wood. I think I have been drugged
as well and cannot think clearly."
.
UPDATE: I put my best computer
online today (serious security violation) BUT WAS ABLE TO RETINEX
THE IMAGE AS A RESULT, AND YOU CAN SEE ENOUGH DETAIL TO SUPPORT
PHILIP BEING DETAINED WITH A BLACK BAG OVER HIS HEAD, THE SAME WAY
THE ARMY DOES IT.
The retinex photo cannot be used for
verification of Exif, if you check this one it will clearly say in
the software tab "Gimp 2.6.12" and NOT the Iphone O.S. version,
which ALL SOFTWARE DOES when it handles and saves an image. This is
why I know the original is legit.
Do this yourself for FREE.
Download the Gimp image editor. Open the image with the Gimp. Click
the colors tab. At the bottom of the list of options, you will see
retinex. Set retinex to Scale: 133, Scale division 1, and dynamic
to 0.0. Retinex squeezes everything out of an image that can
possibly be seen, and it is my opinion that it does reveal
enough.
Normally, a lens will vignette the
corners, and put the least amount of light in the corners. But
Retinex shows clearly that the corners of the image are brighter,
and the center is dark. THAT would be caused by a black bag over
Philip's head.
ASTEROID IMPACT LEVEL UPDATE:
SCAMMERS ARE SAYING THERE NEVER WAS A PHILIP WOOD WORKING FOR IBM.
BUT HIS LINKDIN DESTROYS THAT LIE AND CONFIRMS THE
STORY:
UPDATE: If Philip Wood′s linkdin is
not embedded below exactly as stated, HERE IS THE
LINK UPDATE: Jpeg now substituted due to
regionally served hacks on the Linkdin account.
Image Exif data: THE SMOKING
GUN
The Exif is intact. Exif
data gets embedded in every image by every camera and includes the
circumstances under which the photo was taken. It can be viewed by
saving the image to your desktop, and then right clicking it and
selecting image properties. Hit the details tab. You can see that
the image was taken on March 18 with an Iphone 5, with the ISO at
3200 and a shutter of 1/15. The coordinates are included in the
exif data because the Iphone knows where it is, and the coordinates
are for Diego
Garcia. THE
FIRST TIME A BLANK PHOTO SAID IT ALL.
Exif can't be rewritten with common
software without a trace, ALL software leaves a note in the
application tag that says the picture was modified by an
application. Exif can be erased as well but NOT CHANGED WITHOUT A
TRACE. Photos with the exif intact AND UNCHANGED will hold up in
court. If the Exif is hacked and this is not real, the CIA or a
really good hacker did this, which I doubt, I'd say it's probably
real.
Another smoking gun is that the
voice recognition software put the word personal instead of
personnel. This is completely consistent with a blind software
assisted dial out.
Surrounding this story is the fact
that the man who managed to get this information to Farganne (forum
member Glitch) was harassed and received many threatening voice
mails over it, that is another piece of evidence pointing to this
as being real. One thing is certain, once it's posted here on this
site the genie is OUT OF THE
BOTTLE. I cannot stress
how important it is that the GPS coordinates in the photo do not
perfectly match what Google says and are not posted anywhere on the
web, because it proves that the source of those coordinates did not
come from google or Wikipedia, they really did come from the
imaging device and it HAD TO be at Diego Garcia when it took the
photo.
DEAR U.S. ARMED FORCES: THE GAME IS
OVER. RETURN FLIGHT 370 TO MALAYSIA AIRLINES, RETURN THE PEOPLE TO
THEIR FAMILIES, AND SEND PHILLIP WOOD HOME. You have been
BUSTED!!!
OTHER DEBUNK ATTEMPTS: If
anything was used to re-tag this image, it would say so in the
software tag of the image. Any time software modifies any aspect of
the image, the last thing to touch the image gets put in the
software tag. The Iphone's standard software is in the image tag
and nothing else. That means this image has NOT been re-tagged and
that is the FIRST THING I checked before posting this story. And
NO, YOU CANNOT MODIFY IT WITH A PROGRAMMING EDITOR UNLESS YOU ARE A
MACHINE LANGUAGE GENIUS. Open notepad (which is a basic programming
editor). Drag the photo into notepad. it will open as code. The
Exif is all machine code. This is the NSA type hack I talked about,
unless the NSA or a serious hacker wanted to do this, the photo is
legit. And the surrounding circumstances also show this story to be
legit.
A non shill question: Diego
Garcia is a military installation. Are there civilians on the
island? ANSWER: YES, 1,600 of them. And they have cell phones no
doubt. Civilian cell service would be there. And what about all the
military spouses? They would be there too, and NOT in the military
but (possibly) listed as military. They have phones as well, Diego
Garcia would not be a black hole.
Non shill comment: Geosetter
can modify exif. I did it, I changed the location in the picture.
My comment: Did Geosetter erase the Iphone O.S. version? It should
have, and that would prove the photo fake. Above, all that data is
perfectly intact. All software I have seen will say it modified a
photo. Since Geosetter is public domain it should say it had the
image and produced it with the Iphone O.S. data either added to or
removed entirely. Absent this, Geosetter would be a hacker
app.
Sorcha Faal wrote: Why did
he not post the Exif data. My comment: NOTHING IS BETTER THAN THE
ORIGINAL PHOTO, WHICH CONTAINS THE EXIF. DONT YOU KNOW HOW TO VIEW
IT? THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE CLEAR.
BLOCKBUSTER UPDATE AGAIN:
This got posted to 4chan and was pulled immediately, but 4plebs, an
independently run backup of 4chan which is NOT controlled has the
original on archive, and the date of posting matches the photo.
BINGO! read itHERE. This
answers the question why the photo only surfaced recently. Someone
surfing archives found it. 4chan would be absolutely a PRIME choice
for someone in trouble.
More Debunks answered
There was no Philip wood
working for IBM - this one was really poor. This was the very first
debunk posted anywhere, and it's so thin and transparent well, if
you get fooled by that one let's just say I am not going to help
you by linking out AGAIN. Re read the article
please
The exif data was hacked
-
That would debunk the whole story,
but it is not the case. Actually untraceably changing exif is not
that easy. ALL LEGITIMATE SOFTWARE, EVERY
LAST BIT OF IT OUT THERE, WILL SAY IT HAD THE PICTURE AND PRODUCED
IT IF IT IS SAVED WITH THAT SOFTWARE. THERE ARE NO SUCH
FINGERPRINTS ON PHILIP'S
IMAGE. Most people do
not even know what exif data is. From my experience I would say
that fewer 9 out of 10 people have heard of it. Of the fewer than
10 percent who have, most will be photographers.
I have been doing photography and
known about exif since the beginning of digital photography. And
there have been times, for the sake of sending messages secretly
embedded in Jpegs or claiming ownership of images, I have wanted to
hack exif at least enough to pull entire Jpegs into programming
editors to see if there was anything I could tweak. Except for a
few notes in the Jpeg, the exif is machine language. That's pretty
tough to work with and even most who work as professional
programmers can't do it which makes that scenario highly
implausible. And software like photoshop ALWAYS changes the
software tag and claims full ownership of the image. So even though
there are applications that can edit exif, they always leave a
trace in the software tag. The photo posted by Philip had no such
changes to the software tag.
If the image posted by Philip is NOT
legit, it would have taken someone with an ability to write machine
language to modify it without a trace, or a hacker with an obscure
app to do it, and I call bunk on that because those types of people
are small in number and have better things to do than hatch b.s. on
the web. This was NOT done by a teenager for a week end prank. It
would be a very small number of people that actually managed to do
it, as I said all along - CIA/NSA types or really good hackers. And
I seriously doubt that prospect.
The only thing I have a question for
with regard to how this got done is WHY 10 days?
This posted on the 18th, and that's
quite a while after the event. There is no doubt the Iphone was NOT
up philip's butt the entire time. So now we get into guessing games
about why it took 10 days. My guess? Somehow for a period of time
Philip was tied up under close supervision but not having his butt
watched at the toilet. After the initial search he put the phone in
a more comfortable position in his pants but did not call. And it
took 10 days for him to finally get separated from the other people
as stated in the message and have enough privacy to send a message
out.
Why post to 4chan rather than call
home?
That's pretty easy to explain. The
NSA would have blocked that particular number from reaching anyone
of importance in Philip's life. They do it to my phones all the
time, to such an extent I gave up on cell phones, they are useless
for me. And even Claudia's phones have been cut off from receiving
calls from family members, the NSA does that just to isolate people
who are dissenters. Flight 370 would have been handled. E-mails?
Ditto. Facebook and others that require log in?
DITTO. That left only
totally public blogs that did not require log in to get a message
out, and 4chan is one of those.
Those are the TWO legitimate
questions I can think of that people could actually ask about how
and why, the rest - such as you could never get a phone up your ass
when you are a really smart guy who would have noticed the plane
turned around and the pilot on the intercom saying the plane has
been hijacked and now you have FIVE FULL HOURS TO THINK OF
SOMETHING BEFORE THE PLANE LANDS, come on now, ONE guy out of 230
figured something out. The whole argument about how the phone made
it is in my opinion silly.
The bottom line is that the
arguments against the story are a whole lot weaker than the
arguments supporting it, and when you add to that the fact that the
web site got hacked repeatedly and someone even managed to get a
back ground image of a bloody body strewn all the way through it
for a few hours Saturday night, well, hackers don't have my log
ins, only the NSA or other high level gov types would because I am
too good with passwords (they are typically un hackable ones like
N532r689$^// and with hackers they won't fix it right when they
think I am going to log on, they will leave it up. It got fixed
without me doing anything, I never knew about it until someone told
me. That would be a back stab by an intelligence agency, WHY WOULD
THIS STORY BE THAT IMPORTANT IF IT WAS B.S.? They don't just pull
that type of stunt out of the blue.
And the shillage was MASSIVE on this
one, with outright lies that were very weak early on, evolving into
other lies that were harder to dismiss, and now they are focusing
on the exif and whether or not it can be changed without a trace.
Well, my answer is above and was always in the original post, and
it is the RIGHT ANSWER, YES, BY HACKERS AND INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
TYPES, BUT NOT BY WEEKEND JOE AND THAT MAKES THAT ARGUMENT WEAK.
Ultimately I guess anyone who worked in the right places could do
anything, including walking up to you cloaked by the latest
technology and hitting you in the head with a bean bag. But the
preponderance of evidence weighs heavily in favor of this all being
legit, and that is what I am sticking with.
Exif not
reliable?
Ultimately you could say it is not
reliable because yes, a really good programmer could hack it, and
that is ABSOLUTELY TRUE, but that DOES NOT mean that the photo is
automatically fake.
And look at what a Retinax filter
pulled out of the darkness - Hard to see, but sure looks like it
could be like THIS image from Abu Ghraib:
On 2014-03-31 11:52, Mary
wrote:
Jim, I am a longtime reader and
supporter. Philip Wood was my husband Todd's client - my husband is
a realtor in Keller, TX and we sold Philip's home on Lazy Lane in
Keller several years ago. When he and his wife divorced, we also
sold Elaine a new home just a couple of years ago. We kept in touch
with him from time to time.
I have had trouble sleeping since
the info came out about him being held in a cell with a bag over
his head. Philip is a very nice guy, a man who lived a simple life,
and he was just doing his job for IBM. He was involved with "data
storage" for IBM - at least that's what he told us, and he was so
excited to get over there to Beijing and the surrounding areas to
see the world and help IBM.
Thank you for the work you are
doing, my God - our world is so evil it's unimaginable.
Best Regards,
Mary
My
response:
I am stunned. And doing data storage
for IBM would be a great reason to have him kidnapped - the large
companies are moving to protect themselves from the NSA, and Philip
would have been right in the middle of the NSA's attempts to breach
IBM's security. There is no way to confirm whether or not Philip
would have been important to them, but it is a
curiosity.
Thanks for writing,
James
The best possible debunk
yet:
Hello James,
I read your article with an open
mind in the possibility that Philip Wood sent the message out of
Diego Garcia. I had to do a little research to see how easy it was
to change the location of the photo in the exif data, and I find a
few simple ways to change the location without the program name
being adopted into the modified exif language. Download the app
mappr on iphone, you can take a picture or an old one, then change
the location of it and save it down. It does not show the adopted
program name mappr on the exif after. Go to www.findexif.com to
test the data yourself. I tried it myself and can put any of my
photos anywhere in the world matching the same data as the alleged
Philip Wood photo.
Hope this helps,
Ty
My
response:
That one was good. Best one
yet. That means that it is possible to fake this. But it does not
mean that it is faked. I said all along that it would be possible
to fake this with a hacker app but that it was not likely. And the
Retinex sure looks like it confirms the story - it's still not
clear but sure looks like the same contrast distribution of a black
bag over the head in a selfie.
Ultimately people will have
to see what is here and decide for themselves. Since I now know
about this, it should go up. But I believe Philip is in Diego
garcia with a bag over his head. Where else is the
plane?
|
