Статті в журналах з теми "Forensics and counter-forensics"

Image source forensics is widely considered as one of the most effective ways to verify in a blind way digital image authenticity and integrity. In the last few years, many researchers have applied data-driven approaches to this task, inspired by the excellent performance obtained by those techniques on computer vision problems. In this survey, we present the most important data-driven algorithms that deal with the problem of image source forensics. To make order in this vast field, we have divided the area in five sub-topics: source camera identification, recaptured image forensic, computer graphics (CG) image forensic, GAN-generated image detection, and source social network identification. Moreover, we have included the works on anti-forensics and counter anti-forensics. For each of these tasks, we have highlighted advantages and limitations of the methods currently proposed in this promising and rich research field.

This paper explores the issues facing digital forensics in South Africa. It examines particular cyber threats and cyber threat levels for South Africa and the challenges in addressing the cybercrimes in the country through digital forensics. The paper paints a picture of the cybercrime threats facing South Africa and argues for the need to develop a skill base in digital forensics in order to counter the threats through detection of cybercrime, by analyzing cybercrime reports, consideration of current legislation, and an analysis of computer forensics course provision in South African universities. The paper argues that there is a need to develop digital forensics skills in South Africa through university programs, in addition to associated training courses. The intention in this paper is to promote debate and discussion in order to identify the cyber threats to South Africa and to encourage the development of a framework to counter the threats – through legislation, high tech law enforcement structures and protocols, digital forensics education, digital forensics skills development, and a public and business awareness of cybercrime threats.

Forensics is proposed as a means to understand, trace, and recompile data and computational activities. It has a securitocratic dimension and one that is being developed as a means of opening processes, events and systems into a more public state. This article proposes an analysis of forces at play in the circulation of a ‘screener’ of Quentin Tarantino’s The Hateful Eight and associated files, to suggest that forensic approaches used to control flows of data may be repurposed for dissemination. The article maps a brief history of digital forensics and sets out some of its political entailments, indicating further lines of enquiry regarding the inter-relation of technosocial powers constituted in the interactions between forensics and counter-measures. The article proposes that the posthumanities are partially constituted by a renewed relationship between questions of culture, subjectivity, knowledge and the technical. Some propositions for the technical as grounds for cultural politics are made.

Binary images have found its place in many applications, such as digital forensics involving legal documents, authentication of images, digital books, contracts, and text recognition. Modern digital forensics applications involve binary image processing as part of data hiding techniques for ownership protection, copyright control, and authentication of digital media. Whether in image forensics, health, or other fields, such transformations are often implemented in high-level languages without formal foundations. The lack of formal foundation questions the reliability of the image processing techniques and hence the forensic results loose their legal significance. Furthermore, counter-forensics can impede or mislead the forensic analysis of the digital images. To ensure that any image transformation meet high standards of safety and reliability, more rigorous methods should be applied to image processing applications. To verify the reliability of these transformations, we propose to use formal methods based on theorem proving that can fulfil high standards of safety. To formally investigate binary image processing, in this paper, a reversible formal model of the binary images is defined in the Proof Assistant Coq. Multiple image transformation methods are formalized and their reliability properties are proved. To analyse real-life RGB images, a prototype translator is developed that reads RGB images and translate them to Coq definitions. As the formal definitions and proof scripts can be validated automatically by the computer, this raises the reliability and legal significance of the image forensic applications.

In this paper, the authors examine the adequacy of the counter-terrorism concept, which does not envisage institutional responsibility for collecting, processing, and fixing traces of cyber-related terrorist activities. The starting point is the fact that today numerous human activities and communication take place in the cyberspace. Firstly, the focus is on the aspects of terrorism that present a generator of challenges to social stability and, in this context, the elements of the approach adopted by the current National Security Strategy of the Republic of Serbia. In this analysis, adequacy is evaluated from the point of view of functionality. In this sense, it is an attempt to present elements that influence the effectiveness of counter-terrorism in the information age. Related to this is the specification of the role that digital forensics can play in this area. The conclusion is that an effective counter-terrorism strategy must necessarily encompass the institutional incorporation of digital forensics since it alone can contribute to the timely detection or assertion of responsibility for terrorism in a networked computing environment.

This article describes how digital forensic techniques for source investigation and identification enable forensic analysts to map an image under question to its source device, in a completely blind way, with no a-priori information about the storage and processing. Such techniques operate based on blind image fingerprinting or machine learning based modelling using appropriate image features. Although researchers till date have succeeded to achieve extremely high accuracy, more than 99% with 10-12 candidate cameras, as far as source device prediction is concerned, the practical application of the existing techniques is still doubtful. This is due to the existence of some critical open challenges in this domain, such as exact device linking, open-set challenge, classifier overfitting and counter forensics. In this article, the authors identify those open challenges, with an insight into possible solution strategies.

The growing use of digital evidence from smartphones and social media has led to a digital divide in the US criminal justice system that advantages law enforcement and prosecutors while further increasing the vulnerability of poor people and people of color who rely on public legal assistance. Drawing on a year-long ethnographic study of one of the first digital forensics laboratories in a public defender office, I argue that digital inclusion in the form of better resources for public defenders is necessary for equitable and fair representation in today’s criminal justice system. Findings show that access to digital forensic technologies is an important equalizing tool that allows public defenders to (1) mount strong, data-driven cases; (2) create counter narratives that challenge depictions of marginalized defendants as dangerous; and (3) engage in nuanced storytelling to highlight the complexities of human relationships and life circumstances that shape cases.

The article presents the essential aspects of tactics and techniques applied by criminals with an aim to reduce the effectiveness of surveillance conducted as part of operational activities. The possible actions adopted by criminals with the purpose of preventing surveilling authorities from detecting their activities are characterized. The above issues are exceptionally complicated, owing to the specifics of the activities to be discussed. To date, counter-detection activities of criminal organizations have not been within the main area of interest for forensics. This article points out the advantage of having comprehensive knowledge of criminal tactics and techniques used in this field.

The article presents the essential aspects of tactics and techniques applied by criminals with an aim to reduce the effectiveness of procedural eavesdropping and operational control. The most significant methods of protecting criminal correspondence were characterized. The above issues are exceptionally complicated, owing to the specifics of the activities to be discussed. To date, counter-detection activities of criminal organizations have not been within the main area of interest for forensics. The article highlights the benefits resulting from the knowledge of criminal tactics and techniques used to ensure the confidentiality of correspondence, in particular, in view of the ongoing legislative work pertaining to prosecutorial control exerted over operational and exploratory activities.

Source-camera identification tools assist image forensics investigators to associate an image with a camera. The Photo Response Non-Uniformity (PRNU) noise pattern caused by sensor imperfections has been proven to be an effective way to identify the source camera. However, the PRNU is susceptible to camera settings, scene details, image processing operations (e.g., simple low-pass filtering or JPEG compression), and counter-forensic attacks. A forensic investigator unaware of malicious counter-forensic attacks or incidental image manipulation is at risk of being misled. The spatial synchronization requirement during the matching of two PRNUs also represents a major limitation of the PRNU. To address the PRNU’s fragility issue, in recent years, deep learning-based data-driven approaches have been developed to identify source-camera models. However, the source information learned by existing deep learning models is not able to distinguish individual cameras of the same model. In light of the vulnerabilities of the PRNU fingerprint and data-driven techniques, in this paper, we bring to light the existence of a new robust data-driven device-specific fingerprint in digital images that is capable of identifying individual cameras of the same model in practical forensic scenarios. We discover that the new device fingerprint is location-independent, stochastic, and globally available, which resolves the spatial synchronization issue. Unlike the PRNU, which resides in the high-frequency band, the new device fingerprint is extracted from the low- and mid-frequency bands, which resolves the fragility issue that the PRNU is unable to contend with. Our experiments on various datasets also demonstrate that the new fingerprint is highly resilient to image manipulations such as rotation, gamma correction, and aggressive JPEG compression.

Achievements in the field of biotechnology raise the standard of human life and improve its quality, open up new opportunities for social activity, including for business, and are also used when combating crime. The paper analyzes the problems associated with the study of trace substances of human biological origin, the collection and storage of genomic information, the formation of such a direction as DNA forensics. The author examines the issue of criminal threats associated with the use of biotechnologies, including crimes committed with the use of biological weapons, bioterrorism, and analyzes the criminal use of biotechnologies, including the sphere of assisted human reproduction. The paper defines the possibilities of criminalistics in the process of countering the use of biotechnologies in the commission of criminal offences. First, we are talking about the development of measures to prevent crimes in this area, creation of methods for investigating crimes committed in this area, development of effective technical, tactical and methodological recommendations for verifying information that is significant from a forensic standpoint.The author proves that further development of biotechnologies is impossible without proper legal regulation, without protection from criminal risks. The high level of abuse, including of a criminal nature, in the field of genomic research determines the need to form a scientific basis for developing measures to respond to criminal risks in the field of artificial human reproduction, as well as measures to counter criminal activity in this area. In view of this, according to the author, there is a need to adopt a separate federal law on assisted reproductive technologies.

Biometric systems are becoming more and more efficient due to increasing performance of algorithms. These systems are also vulnerable to various attacks. Presentation of falsified identity to a biometric sensor is one the most urgent challenges for the recent biometric recognition systems. Exploration of specific properties of thermal infrared seems to be a comprehensive solution for detecting face presentation attacks. This letter presents outcome of our study on detecting 3D face masks using thermal infrared imaging and deep learning techniques. We demonstrate results of a two-step neural network-featured method for detecting presentation attacks. Full Text: PDF ReferencesS.R. Arashloo, J. Kittler, W. Christmas, "Face Spoofing Detection Based on Multiple Descriptor Fusion Using Multiscale Dynamic Binarized Statistical Image Features", IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 10, 11 (2015). CrossRef A. Anjos, M.M. Chakka, S. Marcel, "Motion-based counter-measures to photo attacks inface recognition", IET Biometrics 3, 3 (2014). CrossRef M. Killioǧlu, M. Taşkiran, N. Kahraman, "Anti-spoofing in face recognition with liveness detection using pupil tracking", Proc. SAMI IEEE, (2017). CrossRef A. Asaduzzaman, A. Mummidi, M.F. Mridha, F.N. Sibai, "Improving facial recognition accuracy by applying liveness monitoring technique", Proc. ICAEE IEEE, (2015). CrossRef M. Kowalski, "A Study on Presentation Attack Detection in Thermal Infrared", Sensors 20, 14 (2020). CrossRef C. Galdi, et al, "PROTECT: Pervasive and useR fOcused biomeTrics bordEr projeCT - a case study", IET Biometrics 9, 6 (2020). CrossRef D.A. Socolinsky, A. Selinger, J. Neuheisel, "Face recognition with visible and thermal infrared imagery", Comput. Vis Image Underst. 91, 1-2 (2003) CrossRef L. Sun, W. Huang, M. Wu, "TIR/VIS Correlation for Liveness Detection in Face Recognition", Proc. CAIP, (2011). CrossRef J. Seo, I. Chung, "Face Liveness Detection Using Thermal Face-CNN with External Knowledge", Symmetry 2019, 11, 3 (2019). CrossRef A. George, Z. Mostaani, D Geissenbuhler, et al., "Biometric Face Presentation Attack Detection With Multi-Channel Convolutional Neural Network", IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 15, (2020). CrossRef S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, J. Sun, "Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition", Proc. CVPR IEEE 39, (2016). CrossRef K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, J. Sun, "Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition", Proc. CVPR, (2016). CrossRef K. Mierzejewski, M. Mazurek, "A New Framework for Assessing Similarity Measure Impact on Classification Confidence Based on Probabilistic Record Linkage Model", Procedia Manufacturing 44, 245-252 (2020). CrossRef

In this paper the authors propose a universal image counter-forensic scheme that contrasts any detector based on the analysis of the image histogram. Being universal, the scheme does not require knowledge of the detection algorithms available to the forensic analyst, and can be used to conceal traces left in the histogram of the image by any processing tool. Instead of adapting the histogram of the image to fit some statistical model, the proposed scheme makes it practically identical to the histogram of an untouched image, by solving an optimization problem. In doing this, the perceptual similarity between the processed and counter-attacked image is preserved to a large extent. The validity of the scheme in countering both contrast-enhancement and splicing- detection is assessed through experimental validation.

The CubeSat DTUsat-2 was designed and built by students and faculty at the Technical University of Denmark and launched to low earth orbit on June 2014. Its mission was to aid ornithologists in bird migration research. Shortly after launch and orbit injection, it became apparent that all was not nominal. To understand the problem and find the causes, a forensic investigation was initiated. The investigation used recorded Morse-encoded beacons emitted by the satellite as a starting point. This paper presents the real-life data from DTUsat-2 on orbit and the methodologies used to visualize the key element in the investigation, namely, the correlation between orbit position and the beacon counter. Based on the data presented, an explanation for the observed behaviour of DTUsat-2 is given.

In simple terms, Anti-Forensics can be told as the techniques used to counter forensic analysis done by forensic investigators. This paper mainly focuses on some of the most used anti-forensics techniques along with the challenges the forensics investigator faces. There are many tools and techniques available that when used properly can be highly effective against the forensic analysis techniques. Various tools assist you against various anti-forensics techniques like Elimination of evidence source, Data hiding, and Trail obfuscation. These techniques are used mainly to make the investigation consume more time and money. Sensor Noise Camera Identification is a way to link a photo with the camera the photo was taken from using a noise signature that is unique for every camera. KEYWORDS: Anti-Forensics (AF), Forensic Analysis, Anti-Forensic Techniques, Sensor Noise Camera Identification

AbstractExamining the authenticity of images has become increasingly important as manipulation tools become more accessible and advanced. Recent work has shown that while CNN-based image manipulation detectors can successfully identify manipulations, they are also vulnerable to adversarial attacks, ranging from simple double JPEG compression to advanced pixel-based perturbation. In this paper we explore another method of highly plausible attack: printing and scanning. We demonstrate the vulnerability of two state-of-the-art models to this type of attack. We also propose a new machine learning model that performs comparably to these state-of-the-art models when trained and validated on printed and scanned images. Of the three models, our proposed model outperforms the others when trained and validated on images from a single printer. To facilitate this exploration, we create a data set of over 6000 printed and scanned image blocks. Further analysis suggests that variation between images produced from different printers is significant, large enough that good validation accuracy on images from one printer does not imply similar validation accuracy on identical images from a different printer.

AbstractWith the ever increasing number of crimes in which computers or other digital devices are used, digital forensics plays an increasingly important role in today's jurisdiction. The acquisition and investigation of the devices is done by forensic experts, whose reports and personal explanations then form the basis of justice. Because of this great responsibility of the experts, the quality of their investigations has to meet the highest standards. Historically, forensic computing (as digital forensics) developed pragmatically, driven by specific technical needs. Indeed, in comparison with other forensic sciences the field still is rather immature and has many deficits, such as the unclear terminology used in court. In this paper, we introduce notions of (digital) evidence, characteristic evidence, and (characteristic) counter evidence, as well as the definitions of two fundamental forensic reconstruction problems. We show the relation of the observability of the different types of evidence to the solvability of those problems. By doing this, we wish to exemplify the usefulness of formalization in the establishment of a precise terminology. While this will not replace all terminological shortcomings, it (1) may provide the basis for a better understanding between experts, and (2) helps to understand the significance of different types of digital evidence to answer questions in an investigation.

Deeplearning has been used to solve complex problems in various domains. As it advances, it also creates applications which become a major threat to our privacy, security and even to our Democracy. Such an application which is being developed recently is the "Deepfake". Deepfake models can create fake images and videos that humans cannot differentiate them from the genuine ones. Therefore, the counter application to automatically detect and analyze the digital visual media is necessary in today world. This paper details retraining the image classification models to apprehend the features from each deepfake video frames. After feeding different sets of deepfake clips of video fringes through a pretrained layer of bottleneck in the neural network is made for every video frame, already stated layer contains condense data for all images and exposes artificial manipulations in Deepfake videos. When checking Deepfake videos, this technique received more than 87 per cent accuracy. This technique has been tested on the Face Forensics dataset and obtained good accuracy in detection.

In the present digital world malware is the most potent weapon. Malware, especially ransomware, is used in security breaches on a large scale which leads to huge losses in terms of money and critical information for big firms and government organisations. In order to counter the future ransomware attacks it is necessary to carry out a forensic analysis of the malware. This experiment proposes a manual method for dynamic malware analysis so that security researchers or malware analyst can easily understand the behaviour of the ransomware and implement a better solution for reducing the risk of malware attack in future. For doing this experiment Volatility, Regshot and FTK Imager Lite Forensics toolkit were used in a virtual and safe environment. The forensic analysis of a Ransomware is done in a virtual setup to prevent any infection to the base machine and carry out detailed analysis of the behaviour of the malware under different conditions. Malware analysis is important because the behavioral analysis helps in developing better mitigation techniques thereby reducing infection risks. The research can prove effective in development of a ransomware decryptor which can be used to recover data after an attack has encrypted the files.

AbstractSource camera identification is an important and challenging problem in digital image forensics. The clues of the device used to capture the digital media are very useful for Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs), especially to help them collect more intelligence in digital forensics. In our work, we focus on identifying the source camera device based on digital videos using deep learning methods. In particular, we evaluate deep learning models with increasing levels of complexity for source camera identification and show that with such sophistication the scene-suppression techniques do not aid in model performance. In addition, we mention several common machine learning strategies that are counter-productive in achieving a high accuracy for camera identification. We conduct systematic experiments using 28 devices from the VISION data set and evaluate the model performance on various video scenarios—flat (i.e., homogeneous), indoor, and outdoor and evaluate the impact on classification accuracy when the videos are shared via social media platforms such as YouTube and WhatsApp. Unlike traditional PRNU-noise (Photo Response Non-Uniform)-based methods which require flat frames to estimate camera reference pattern noise, the proposed method has no such constraint and we achieve an accuracy of $$72.75 \pm 1.1 \%$$ 72.75 ± 1.1 % on the benchmark VISION data set. Furthermore, we also achieve state-of-the-art accuracy of $$71.75\%$$ 71.75 % on the QUFVD data set in identifying 20 camera devices. These two results are the best ever reported on the VISION and QUFVD data sets. Finally, we demonstrate the runtime efficiency of the proposed approach and its advantages to LEAs.

Increasing the effectiveness of the prosecutor’s activity in criminal proceedings is an extremely urgent task, taking into account the changes taking place in the legal life of the state, the development of scientific and technical progress, and the processes of reforming law enforcement agencies. There are also negative circumstances that today require rethinking and adapting the activities of the prosecutor’s office to new, extreme conditions, namely the need to counter the armed aggression of the Russian Federation. These and other circumstances determine the formation of updated principles of the prosecutor’s activity. Purpose of the article is to highlight the theoretical foundations and form practical recommendations regarding the forensic support of the prosecutor’s activities in criminal proceedings. By using the method of dialectics, special legal methods, and processing the source base, it was established that the goal of forensic support of the prosecutor’s activities is to achieve the tasks defined in Art. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The realization of this goal depends on the solution of specific tasks, which consist in the development of new and improvement of existing technical means, methods and techniques for working with forensically significant information; building systems of tactical techniques; the formation of organizational foundations and the development of methodological recommendations for the implementation of criminal proceedings regarding various types of criminal offenses. Forensic support of the prosecutor’s activities is implemented in accordance with the technical, tactical, and methodical forensic direction, techniques, means, and methods developed by forensics are used

Abstract The drive for innovation, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness has seen governments increasingly turn to artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance their operations. The significant growth in the use of AI mechanisms in the areas of migration and border control makes the potential for its application to the process of refugee status determination (RSD), which is burdened by delay and heavy caseloads, a very real possibility. AI may have a role to play in supporting decision makers to assess the credibility of asylum seekers, as long as it is understood as a component of the humanitarian context. This article argues that AI will only benefit refugees if it does not replicate the problems of the current system. Credibility assessments, a central element of RSD, are flawed because the bipartite standard of a ‘well-founded fear of being persecuted’ involves consideration of a claimant’s subjective fearfulness and the objective validation of that fear. Subjective fear imposes an additional burden on the refugee, and the ‘objective’ language of credibility indicators does not prevent the challenges decision makers face in assessing the credibility of other humans when external, but largely unseen, factors such as memory, trauma, and bias, are present. Viewing the use of AI in RSD as part of the digital transformation of the refugee regime forces us to consider how it may affect decision-making efficiencies, as well as its impact(s) on refugees. Assessments of harm and benefit cannot be disentangled from the challenges AI is being tasked to address. Through an analysis of algorithmic decision making, predictive analysis, biometrics, automated credibility assessments, and digital forensics, this article reveals the risks and opportunities involved in the application of AI in RSD. On the one hand, AI’s potential to produce greater standardization, to mine and parse large amounts of data, and to address bias, holds significant possibility for increased consistency, improved fact-finding, and corroboration. On the other hand, machines may end up replicating and manifesting the unconscious biases and assumptions of their human developers, and AI has a limited ability to read emotions and process impacts on memory. The prospective nature of a well-founded fear is counter-intuitive if algorithms learn based on training data that is historical, and an increased ability to corroborate facts may shift the burden of proof to the asylum seeker. Breaches of data protection regulations and human rights loom large. The potential application of AI to RSD reveals flaws in refugee credibility assessments that stem from the need to assess subjective fear. If the use of AI in RSD is to become an effective and ethical form of humanitarian tech, the ‘well-founded fear of being persecuted’ standard should be based on objective risk only.

Cyborgs already walk among us. (“Cures to Come” 76) This essay was begun as a reaction to a Hallmark Hall of Fame television movie called Sweet Nothing in My Ear (2008), which follows the lives of two parents, Dan, who is hearing (played by Jeff Daniels), and Laura, who is deaf (Marlee Matlin), as they struggle to make a decision about whether or not to give their 11-year-old son, Adam (late-deafened), a cochlear implant. Dan and Laura represent different perspectives, hearing and deaf perspectives. The film dramatizes the parents’ conflict and negotiation, exposing audiences to both sides of the cochlear implant debate, albeit in a fairly simplistic way. Nevertheless, it represents the lives of deaf people and gives voice to debates about cochlear implants with more accuracy and detail than most film and television dramas. One of the central scenes in the film is what I call the “activation scene”, quite common to cochlear implant narratives. In the scene, the protagonists witness a child having his implant activated or turned on. The depiction is reminiscent of the WATER scene in the film about Helen Keller, The Miracle Worker, employing a sentimental visual rhetoric. First, the two parents are shown seated near the child, clasping their hands as if in prayer. The audiologist, wielder of technology and therefore clearly the authority figure in the scene, types away furiously on her laptop. At the moment of being “turned on,” the child suddenly “hears” his father calling “David! David!” He gazes angelically toward heaven as piano music plays plaintively in the background. The parents all but fall to their knees and the protagonist of the film, Dan, watching through a window, weeps. It is a scene of cure, of healing, of “miracle,” a hyper-sentimentalised portrait of what is in reality often a rather anti-climactic event. It was certainly anti-climactic in my son, Michael’s case. I was taken aback by how this scene was presented and dismayed overall at some of the inaccuracies, small though they were, in the portrayal of cochlear implants in this film. It was, after all, according to the Nielsen ratings, seen by 8 million people. I began to wonder what kinds of misconceptions my son was going to face when he met people whose only exposure to implants was through media representations. Spurred by this question, I started to research other recent portrayals of people with implants on U.S. television in the past ten years, to see how cochlear implant (hereafter referred to as CI) identity has been portrayed by American media. For most of American history, deaf people have been portrayed in print and visual media as exotic “others,” and have long been the subject of an almost morbid cultural fascination. Christopher Krentz suggests that, particularly in the nineteenth century, scenes pairing sentimentality and deafness repressed an innate, Kristevan “abject” revulsion towards deaf people. Those who are deaf highlight and define, through their ‘lack’, the “unmarked” body. The fact of their deafness, understood as lack, conjures up an ideal that it does not attain, the ideal of the so-called “normal” or “whole” body. In recent years, however, the figure of the “deaf as Other” in the media, has shifted from what might be termed the “traditionally” deaf character, to what Brenda Jo Brueggeman (in her recent book Deaf Subjects: Between Identities and Places), calls “the new deaf cyborg” or the deaf person with a cochlear implant (4). N. Katharine Hailes states that cyborgs are now “the stage on which are performed contestations about the body boundaries that have often marked class, ethnic, and cultural differences” (85). In this essay, I claim that the character with a CI, as portrayed in the media, is now not only a strange, “marked” “Other,” but is also a screen upon which viewers project anxieties about technology, demonstrating both fascination fear. In her book, Brueggeman issues a call to action, saying that Deaf Studies must now begin to examine what she calls “implanting rhetorics,” or “the rhetorical relationships between our technologies and our identity” and therefore needs to attend to the construction of “the new deaf cyborg” (18). This short study will serve, I hope, as both a response to that injunction and as a jumping-off point for more in-depth studies of the construction of the CI identity and the implications of these constructions. First, we should consider what a cochlear implant is and how it functions. The National Association of the Deaf in the United States defines the cochlear implant as a device used to help the user perceive sound, i.e., the sensation of sound that is transmitted past the damaged cochlea to the brain. In this strictly sensorineural manner, the implant works: the sensation of sound is delivered to the brain. The stated goal of the implant is for it to function as a tool to enable deaf children to develop language based on spoken communication. (“NAD Position”) The external portion of the implant consists of the following parts: a microphone, which picks up sound from the environment, which is contained in the behind-the-ear device that resembles the standard BTE hearing aid; in this “hearing aid” there is also a speech processor, which selects and arranges sounds picked up by the microphone. The processor transmits signals to the transmitter/receiver, which then converts them into electric impulses. Part of the transmitter sits on the skin and attaches to the inner portion of the transmitter by means of a magnet. The inner portion of the receiver/stimulator sends the impulses down into the electrode array that lies inside the cochlea, which in turn stimulates the auditory nerve, giving the brain the impression of sound (“Cochlear Implants”). According to manufacturer’s statistics, there are now approximately 188,000 people worldwide who have obtained cochlear implants, though the number of these that are in use is not known (Nussbaum). That is what a cochlear implant is. Before we can look at how people with implants are portrayed in the media, before we examine constructions of identity, perhaps we should first ask what constitutes a “real” CI identity? This is, of course, laughable; pinning down a homogeneous CI identity is no more likely than finding a blanket definition of “deaf identity.” For example, at this point in time, there isn’t even a word or term in American culture for someone with an implant. I struggle with how to phrase it in this essay - “implantee?” “recipient?” - there are no neat labels. In the USA you can call a person deaf, Deaf (the “D” representing a specific cultural and political identity), hearing impaired, hard of hearing, and each gradation implies, for better or worse, some kind of subject position. There are no such terms for a person who gets an implant. Are people with implants, as suggested above, just deaf? Deaf? Are they hard of hearing? There is even debate in the ASL community as to what sign should be used to indicate “someone who has a cochlear implant.” If a “CI identity” cannot be located, then perhaps the rhetoric that is used to describe it may be. Paddy Ladd, in Understanding Deaf Culture, does a brilliant job of exploring the various discourses that have surrounded deaf culture throughout history. Stuart Blume borrows heavily from Ladd in his “The Rhetoric and Counter-Rhetoric of a 'Bionic' Technology”, where he points out that an “essential and deliberate feature” of the history of the CI from the 60s onward, was that it was constructed in an overwhelmingly positive light by the mass media, using what Ladd calls the “medical” rhetorical model. That is, that the CI is a kind of medical miracle that promised to cure deafness. Within this model one may find also the sentimental, “missionary” rhetoric that Krentz discusses, what Ladd claims is a revival of the evangelism of the nineteenth-century Oralist movement in America. Indeed, newspaper articles in the 1980s and 90s hailed the implant as a “breakthrough”, a “miracle”; even a quick survey of headlines shows evidence of this: “Upton Boy Can Hear at Last!”, “Girl with a New Song in Her Heart”, “Children Head Queue for Bionic Ears” (Lane). As recently as January 2010, an issue of National Geographic featured on its cover the headline Merging Man and Machine: The Bionic Age. Sure enough, the second photograph in the story is of a child’s bilateral cochlear implant, with the caption “within months of the surgery (the child) spoke the words his hearing parents longed for: Mama and Dada.” “You’re looking at a real bionic kid,” says Johns Hopkins University surgeon John Niparko, proudly (37). To counter this medical/corporate rhetoric of cure, Ladd and Blume claim, the deaf community devised a counter-rhetoric, a discourse in which the CI is not cast in the language of miracle and life, but instead in terms of death, mutilation, and cultural oppression. Here, the implant is depicted as the last in a long line of sadistic experiments using the deaf as guinea pigs. Often the CI is framed in the language of Nazism and genocide as seen in the title of an article in the British Deaf News: “Cochlear Implants: Oralism’s Final Solution.” So, which of these two “implanting rhetorics” is most visible in the current construction of the CI in American television? Is the CI identity presented by rendering people with CIs impossibly positive, happy characters? Is it delineated using the metaphors of the sentimental, of cure, of miracle? Or is the CI identity constructed using the counter-rhetorical references to death, oppression and cultural genocide? One might hypothesize that television, like other media, cultivating as it does the values of the hearing hegemony, would err on the side of promulgating the medicalised, positivist rhetoric of the “cure” for deafness. In an effort to find out, I conducted a general survey of American television shows from 2000 to now that featured characters with CIs. I did not include news shows or documentaries in my survey. Interestingly, some of the earliest television portrayals of CIs appeared in that bastion of American sentimentality, the daytime soap opera. In 2006, on the show “The Young and the Restless”, a “troubled college student who contracted meningitis” received an implant, and in 2007 “All My Children” aired a story arc about a “toddler who becomes deaf after a car crash.” It is interesting to note that both characters were portrayed as “late-deafened”, or suddenly inflicted with the loss of a sense they previously possessed, thus avoiding any whiff of controversy about early implantation. But one expects a hyper-sentimentalised portrayal of just about everything in daytime dramas like this. What is interesting is that when people with CIs have appeared on several “reality” programs, which purport to offer “real,” unadulterated glimpses into people’s lives, the rhetoric is no less sentimentalized than the soaps (perhaps because these shows are no less fabricated). A good example of this is the widely watched and, I think, ironically named show “True Life” which appears on MTV. This is a series that claims to tell the “remarkable real-life stories of young people and the unusual subcultures they inhabit.” In episode 42, “ True Life: I’m Deaf”, part of the show follows a young man, Chris, born deaf and proud of it (his words), who decides to get a cochlear implant because he wants to be involved in the hearing world. Through an interpreter Chris explains that he wants an implant so he can communicate with his friends, talk with girls, and ultimately fulfill his dreams of having a job and getting married (one has to ask: are these things he can’t do without an implant?). The show’s promo asks “how do you go from living a life in total silence to fully understanding the spoken language?” This statement alone contains two elements common to the “miracle” rhetoric, first that the “tragic” deaf victim will emerge from a completely lonely, silent place (not true; most deaf people have some residual hearing, and if you watch the show you see Chris signing, “speaking” voluminously) to seamlessly, miraculously, “fully” joining and understanding the hearing world. Chris, it seems, will only come into full being when he is able to join the hearing world. In this case, the CI will cure what ails him. According to “True Life.” Aside from “soap opera” drama and so-called reality programming, by far the largest dissemination of media constructions of the CI in the past ten years occurred on top-slot prime-time television shows, which consist primarily of the immensely popular genre of the medical and police procedural drama. Most of these shows have at one time or another had a “deaf” episode, in which there is a deaf character or characters involved, but between 2005 and 2008, it is interesting to note that most, if not all of the most popular of these have aired episodes devoted to the CI controversy, or have featured deaf characters with CIs. The shows include: CSI (both Miami and New York), Cold Case, Law and Order (both SVU and Criminal Intent), Scrubs, Gideon’s Crossing, and Bones. Below is a snippet of dialogue from Bones: Zach: {Holding a necklace} He was wearing this.Angela: Catholic boy.Brennan: One by two forceps.Angela {as Brennan pulls a small disc out from behind the victim’s ear} What is that?Brennan: Cochlear implant. Looks like the birds were trying to get it.Angela: That would set a boy apart from the others, being deaf.(Bones, “A Boy in the Tree”, 1.3, 2005) In this scene, the forensics experts are able to describe significant points of this victim’s identity using the only two solid artifacts left in the remains, a crucifix and a cochlear implant. I cite this scene because it serves, I believe, as a neat metaphor for how these shows, and indeed television media in general, are, like the investigators, constantly engaged in the business of cobbling together identity: in this particular case, a cochlear implant identity. It also shows how an audience can cultivate or interpret these kinds of identity constructions, here, the implant as an object serves as a tangible sign of deafness, and from this sign, or clue, the “audience” (represented by the spectator, Angela) immediately infers that the victim was lonely and isolated, “set apart from the others.” Such wrongheaded inferences, frivolous as they may seem coming from the realm of popular culture, have, I believe, a profound influence on the perceptions of larger society. The use of the CI in Bones is quite interesting, because although at the beginning of the show the implant is a key piece of evidence, that which marks and identifies the dead/deaf body, the character’s CI identity proves almost completely irrelevant to the unfolding of the murder-mystery. The only times the CI character’s deafness is emphasized are when an effort is made to prove that the he committed suicide (i.e., if you’re deaf you are therefore “isolated,” and therefore you must be miserable enough to kill yourself). Zak, one of the forensics officers says, “I didn’t talk to anyone in high school and I didn’t kill myself” and another officer comments that the boy was “alienated by culture, by language, and by his handicap” (odd statements, since most deaf children with or without implants have remarkably good language ability). Also, in another strange moment, the victim’s ambassador/mother shows a video clip of the child’s CI activation and says “a person who lived through this miracle would never take his own life” (emphasis mine). A girlfriend, implicated in the murder (the boy is killed because he threatened to “talk”, revealing a blackmail scheme), says “people didn’t notice him because of the way he talked but I liked him…” So at least in this show, both types of “implanting rhetoric” are employed; a person with a CI, though the recipient of a “miracle,” is also perceived as “isolated” and “alienated” and unfortunately, ends up dead. This kind of rather negative portrayal of a person with a CI also appears in the CSI: New York episode ”Silent Night” which aired in 2006. One of two plot lines features Marlee Matlin as the mother of a deaf family. At the beginning of the episode, after feeling some strange vibrations, Matlin’s character, Gina, checks on her little granddaughter, Elizabeth, who is crying hysterically in her crib. She finds her daughter, Alison, dead on the floor. In the course of the show, it is found that a former boyfriend, Cole, who may have been the father of the infant, struggled with and shot Alison as he was trying to kidnap the baby. Apparently Cole “got his hearing back” with a cochlear implant, no longer considered himself Deaf, and wanted the child so that she wouldn’t be raised “Deaf.” At the end of the show, Cole tries to abduct both grandmother and baby at gunpoint. As he has lost his external transmitter, he is unable to understand what the police are trying to tell him and threatens to kill his hostages. He is arrested in the end. In this case, the CI recipient is depicted as a violent, out of control figure, calmed (in this case) only by Matlin’s presence and her ability to communicate with him in ASL. The implication is that in getting the CI, Cole is “killing off” his Deaf identity, and as a result, is mentally unstable. Talking to Matlin, whose character is a stand-in for Deaf culture, is the only way to bring him back to his senses. The October 2007 episode of CSI: Miami entitled “Inside-Out” is another example of the counter-rhetoric at work in the form of another implant corpse. A police officer, trying to prevent the escape of a criminal en route to prison, thinks he has accidentally shot an innocent bystander, a deaf woman. An exchange between the coroner and a CSI goes as follows: (Alexx Woods): “This is as innocent as a victim gets.”(Calleigh Duquesne): “How so?”AW: Check this out.”CD: “I don’t understand. Her head is magnetized? Steel plate?”AW: “It’s a cochlear implant. Helps deaf people to receive and process speech and sounds.”(CSI dramatization) AW VO: “It’s surgically implanted into the inner ear. Consists of a receiver that decodes and transmits to an electrode array sending a signal to the brain.”CD: “Wouldn’t there be an external component?”AW: “Oh, she must have lost it before she was shot.”CD: “Well, that explains why she didn’t get out of there. She had no idea what was going on.” (TWIZ) Based on the evidence, the “sign” of the implant, the investigators are able to identify the victim as deaf, and they infer therefore that she is innocent. It is only at the end of the program that we learn that the deaf “innocent” was really the girlfriend of the criminal, and was on the scene aiding in his escape. So she is at first “as innocent” as they come, and then at the end, she is the most insidious of the criminals in the episode. The writers at least provide a nice twist on the more common deaf-innocent stereotype. Cold Case showcased a CI in the 2008 episode “Andy in C Minor,” in which the case of a 17-year-old deaf boy is reopened. The boy, Andy, had disappeared from his high school. In the investigation it is revealed that his hearing girlfriend, Emma, convinced him to get an implant, because it would help him play the piano, which he wanted to do in order to bond with her. His parents, deaf, were against the idea, and had him promise to break up with Emma and never bring up the CI again. His body is found on the campus, with a cochlear device next to his remains. Apparently Emma had convinced him to get the implant and, in the end, Andy’s father had reluctantly consented to the surgery. It is finally revealed that his Deaf best friend, Carlos, killed him with a blow to the back of the head while he was playing the piano, because he was “afraid to be alone.” This show uses the counter-rhetoric of Deaf genocide in an interesting way. In this case it is not just the CI device alone that renders the CI character symbolically “dead” to his Deaf identity, but it leads directly to his being literally executed by, or in a sense, excommunicated from, Deaf Culture, as it is represented by the character of Carlos. The “House Divided” episode of House (2009) provides the most problematic (or I should say absurd) representation of the CI process and of a CI identity. In the show, a fourteen-year-old deaf wrestler comes into the hospital after experiencing terrible head pain and hearing “imaginary explosions.” Doctors Foreman and Thirteen dutifully serve as representatives of both sides of the “implant debate”: when discussing why House hasn’t mocked the patient for not having a CI, Thirteen says “The patient doesn’t have a CI because he’s comfortable with who he is. That’s admirable.” Foreman says, “He’s deaf. It’s not an identity, it’s a disability.” 13: “It’s also a culture.” F: “Anything I can simulate with $3 earplugs isn’t a culture.” Later, House, talking to himself, thinks “he’s going to go through life deaf. He has no idea what he’s missing.” So, as usual, without permission, he orders Chase to implant a CI in the patient while he is under anesthesia for another procedure (a brain biopsy). After the surgery the team asks House why he did it and he responds, “Why would I give someone their hearing? Ask God the same question you’d get the same answer.” The shows writers endow House’s character, as they usually do, with the stereotypical “God complex” of the medical establishment, but in doing also they play beautifully into the Ladd and Blume’s rhetoric of medical miracle and cure. Immediately after the implant (which the hospital just happened to have on hand) the incision has, miraculously, healed overnight. Chase (who just happens to be a skilled CI surgeon and audiologist) activates the external processor (normally a months-long process). The sound is overwhelming, the boy hears everything. The mother is upset. “Once my son is stable,” the mom says, “I want that THING out of his head.” The patient also demands that the “thing” be removed. Right after this scene, House puts a Bluetooth in his ear so he can talk to himself without people thinking he’s crazy (an interesting reference to how we all are becoming cyborgs, more and more “implanted” with technology). Later, mother and son have the usual touching sentimental scene, where she speaks his name, he hears her voice for the first time and says, “Is that my name? S-E-T-H?” Mom cries. Seth’s deaf girlfriend later tells him she wishes she could get a CI, “It’s a great thing. It will open up a whole new world for you,” an idea he rejects. He hears his girlfriend vocalize, and asks Thirteen if he “sounds like that.” This for some reason clinches his decision about not wanting his CI and, rather than simply take off the external magnet, he rips the entire device right out of his head, which sends him into shock and system failure. Ultimately the team solves the mystery of the boy’s initial ailment and diagnoses him with sarcoidosis. In a final scene, the mother tells her son that she is having them replace the implant. She says it’s “my call.” This show, with its confusing use of both the sentimental and the counter-rhetoric, as well as its outrageous inaccuracies, is the most egregious example of how the CI is currently being constructed on television, but it, along with my other examples, clearly shows the Ladd/Blume rhetoric and counter rhetoric at work. The CI character is on one hand portrayed as an innocent, infantilized, tragic, or passive figure that is the recipient of a medical miracle kindly urged upon them (or forced upon them, as in the case of House). On the other hand, the CI character is depicted in the language of the counter-rhetoric: as deeply flawed, crazed, disturbed or damaged somehow by the incursions onto their Deaf identity, or, in the worst case scenario, they are dead, exterminated. Granted, it is the very premise of the forensic/crime drama to have a victim, and a dead victim, and it is the nature of the police drama to have a “bad,” criminal character; there is nothing wrong with having both good and bad CI characters, but my question is, in the end, why is it an either-or proposition? Why is CI identity only being portrayed in essentialist terms on these types of shows? Why are there no realistic portrayals of people with CIs (and for that matter, deaf people) as the richly varied individuals that they are? These questions aside, if these two types of “implanting rhetoric”, the sentimentalised and the terminated, are all we have at the moment, what does it mean? As I mentioned early in this essay, deaf people, along with many “others,” have long helped to highlight and define the hegemonic “norm.” The apparent cultural need for a Foucauldian “marked body” explains not only the popularity of crime dramas, but it also could explain the oddly proliferant use of characters with cochlear implants in these particular shows. A person with an implant on the side of their head is definitely a more “marked” body than the deaf person with no hearing aid. The CI character is more controversial, more shocking; it’s trendier, “sexier”, and this boosts ratings. But CI characters are, unlike their deaf predecessors, now serving an additional cultural function. I believe they are, as I claim in the beginning of this essay, screens upon which our culture is now projecting repressed anxieties about emergent technology. The two essentialist rhetorics of the cochlear implant, the rhetoric of the sentimental, medical model, and the rhetoric of genocide, ultimately represent our technophilia and our technophobia. The CI character embodies what Debra Shaw terms a current, “ontological insecurity that attends the interface between the human body and the datasphere” (85). We are growing more nervous “as new technologies shape our experiences, they blur the lines between the corporeal and incorporeal, between physical space and virtual space” (Selfe). Technology either threatens the integrity of the self, “the coherence of the body” (we are either dead or damaged) or technology allows us to transcend the limitations of the body: we are converted, “transformed”, the recipient of a happy modern miracle. In the end, I found that representations of CI on television (in the United States) are overwhelmingly sentimental and therefore essentialist. It seems that the conflicting nineteenth century tendency of attraction and revulsion toward the deaf is still, in the twenty-first century, evident. We are still mired in the rhetoric of “cure” and “control,” despite an active Deaf counter discourse that employs the language of the holocaust, warning of the extermination of yet another cultural minority. We are also daily becoming daily more “embedded in cybernetic systems,” with our laptops, emails, GPSs, PDAs, cell phones, Bluetooths, and the likes. We are becoming increasingly engaged in a “necessary relationship with machines” (Shaw 91). We are gradually becoming no longer “other” to the machine, and so our culturally constructed perceptions of ourselves are being threatened. In the nineteenth century, divisions and hierarchies between a white male majority and the “other” (women, African Americans, immigrants, Native Americans) began to blur. Now, the divisions between human and machine, as represented by a person with a CI, are starting to blur, creating anxiety. Perhaps this anxiety is why we are trying, at least in the media, symbolically to ‘cure’ the marked body or kill off the cyborg. Future examinations of the discourse should, I believe, use these media constructions as a lens through which to continue to examine and illuminate the complex subject position of the CI identity, and therefore, perhaps, also explore what the subject position of the post/human identity will be. References "A Boy in a Tree." Patrick Norris (dir.), Hart Hanson (by), Emily Deschanel (perf.). Bones, Fox Network, 7 Sep. 2005. “Andy in C Minor.” Jeannete Szwarc (dir.), Gavin Harris (by), Kathryn Morris (perf.). Cold Case, CBS Network, 30 March 2008. Blume, Stuart. “The Rhetoric and Counter Rhetoric of a “Bionic” Technology.” Science, Technology and Human Values 22.1 (1997): 31-56. Brueggemann, Brenda Jo. Deaf Subjects: Between Identities and Places. New York: New York UP, 2009. “Cochlear Implant Statistics.” ASL-Cochlear Implant Community. Blog. Citing Laurent Le Clerc National Deaf Education Center. Gallaudet University, 18 Mar. 2008. 29 Apr. 2010 ‹http:/ /aslci.blogspot.com/2008/03/cochlear-implant-statistics.html›. “Cures to Come.” Discover Presents the Brain (Spring 2010): 76. Fischman, Josh. “Bionics.” National Geographic Magazine 217 (2010). “House Divided.” Greg Yaitanes (dir.), Matthew V. Lewis (by), Hugh Laurie (perf.). House, Fox Network, 22 Apr. 2009. “Inside-Out.” Gina Lamar (dir.), Anthony Zuiker (by), David Caruso (perf.). CSI: Miami, CBS Network, 8 Oct. 2007. Krentz, Christopher. Writing Deafness: The Hearing Line in Nineteenth-Century American Literature. Chapel Hill: UNC P, 2007. Ladd, Paddy. Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Limited, 2002. Lane, Harlan. A Journey Into the Deaf-World. San Diego: DawnSignPress, 1996. “NAD Position Statement on the Cochlear Implant.” National Association of the Deaf. 6 Oct. 2000. 29 April 2010 ‹http://www.nad.org/issues/technology/assistive-listening/cochlear-implants›. Nussbaum, Debra. “Manufacturer Information.” Cochlear Implant Information Center. National Deaf Education Center. Gallaudet University. 29 Apr. 2010 < http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu >. Shaw, Debra. Technoculture: The Key Concepts. Oxford: Berg, 2008. “Silent Night.” Rob Bailey (dir.), Anthony Zuiker (by), Gary Sinise (perf.). CSI: New York, CBS Network, 13 Dec. 2006. “Sweet Nothing in My Ear.” Joseph Sargent (dir.), Stephen Sachs (by), Jeff Daniels (perf.). Hallmark Hall of Fame Production, 20 Apr. 2008. TWIZ TV scripts. CSI: Miami, “Inside-Out.” “What Is the Surgery Like?” FAQ, University of Miami Cochlear Implant Center. 29 Apr. 2010 ‹http://cochlearimplants.med.miami.edu/faq/index.asp›.