February 2020 donation progress: $116.32/$250 (47%). Click to learn more...
close
Hello! Thank you for using yiff.party!

We hope you enjoy using it. yiff.party operates on a non-profit basis, and as such, all the server expenses are paid by our users. We don't want to run ads or infect you with crypto miners. We depend on users like you to keep the site running, and to preserve years and terabytes of amazing content—some of which is no longer available from its original creators!

Because of the nature of the site, many users are reluctant to donate. That's OK! yiff.party was created so everyone can enjoy the content we host without any restrictions or paywalls. But if you value the service we provide, and are able to, we—and our users—would be tremendously grateful if you considered making a donation.

Donation progress for February 2020

So far, approximately $116.32 has been raised out of our target of $250.00. We're about 47% of the way there! Please note: this tracker is updated manually—don't worry if your donation doesn't show up immediately!

yiff.party's server costs are due on the last day of each month. So, we need to meet this goal before 29 February!

How to donate?

At this time, yiff.party can only accept donations in numerous cryptocurrencies. Please select a currency below to display the relevant donation address.

Bitcoin (BTC)
Bitcoin Cash (BCH)
Ethereum (ETH)
Ethereum Classic (ETC)
Litecoin (LTC)
Why can't I donate through other means (eg. PayPal)?

Due to the nature of sites like yiff.party, it is very difficult to find payment processors who will accept clients like us. If we were to accept donations via PayPal, it wouldn't take more than a day for someone to submit an abuse report and get our account frozen. Until a viable way of accepting monetary donations becomes available, cryptocurrency will remain the only option.

There are many resources available on how to purchase crypto. For Bitcoin, check out bitcoin.org's page on buying Bitcoin for a list of methods. For beginner Bitcoin users, yiff.party recommends using an escrow service such as LocalBitcoins.

Primeleap (yet another topic)

undoReturn
i82pj24x22e41.jpg (66.9KiB, 640x939) save_alt

I know it has been discussed dozens of times but i can't see the issue.
I was actually thinking about supporting one guy on patreon but if my theories are true it's not really worth it.

Basically you say leaking anything from primeleap is impossible. You just subscribe to patreon account, get access to primeleap, download images you want (and eventually share). But if you say it's impossible, does it mean these images can be even downloaded, or they are somehow locked on the website? Because then even actually paying is not worth it if you can't claim images you want for yourself.

Not as knowledgeable as others, but from what I understand you can download the images and leak them, the reason they say it’s impossible is because doing it anonymously. Each image is encrypted in some what that makes it where if you were to leak it, they can find out it was you and proceed to ban you for it. It’s possible to remove this watermark that does this, but it isn’t worth it given the needed effort to remove it. You can download, but you can’t leak it online without you being discovered and subsequentially banned. Again, I don’t know the whole thing, but that’s what I understand to be the case.

That's indeed problematic, but i would say there is always a solution... one way or another. But i will leave it to professionals.

Sadly, we seem to have some professionals in other related threads, but they're having to deal with a bunch of obnoxious trolls and know-it-alls. There's also no collaborative effort to tackle this issue. It seems the most extreme method to this problem is for people to just sit on the content as it builds up for like a year or so and just leak it then.

>Basically you say leaking anything from primeleap is impossible

You can certainly leak them. Once. The images have some really, really high level stenography embedded in them. They even move certain parts of the image around to uniquely identify the leaking accounts. So once you leak the image, they know what account it came from. And once they ban you, they'll ban you and all payment information you used. So you have to make a new payment information thing each and every time you leak. A new paypal account every month, etc. Apparently the admin here said shit about burner cards or gift cards used for patreon or something, but I don't have any experience with that.

Best you can hope for is someone to leak shit once a month. There won't be any consistent updates to primeleap creators, at least not as long as they keep catching and banning anyone that leaks their shit.

But, silver lining: Everyone who uses primeleap sees revenue steadily decline, from what I've seen. So hopefully the shit will die off entirely. Their page just says 'funded by artists' so I don't even think Primeleap has a steady income. They must be losing money hand over fist running this shit and developing it constantly. Hopefully they pull the rug from under the artists in a couple months time and say some shit like 'we want 5% of your profits to keep watermarking your content' and then everyone leaves the site and they fade into utter obscurity.

But until that point... leak the content, but you WILL be banned. And when you get banned, you will be banned from accessing content from any creator who uses primeleap.

Sustainable or not, that is our only hope, because what it promises has worked since and everyone who ever lacked has gotten thier ass handed to them.

And before anyone says "Just make another account" they know if you do, patreon collects way too much information.

Yearly suicide accounts are all we got, and once used, that person is no good to us.

>>58159

>>58143
>really high level stenography
It's already been discussed that they just jiggle the layers around. It's autistic but effective. You would need a large corpus of images to reconstruct one that won't get you banned. Why bother doing that when you could just buy more burner accounts instead. It's strictly amateur roll your own security through obscurity. If they could afford to license license good, robust watermarking software they wouldn't be fucking around with delivering pictures that are perceptibly different.

I doubt their detection system is robust against significant distortion, so random warping could probably defeat it if you don't mind noodly lines in your leaked porn. It would at least look better than the blurry shit people were posting on u18 when it first rolled out.

_ ,booooobs~01.jpg (61.0KiB, 1008x1049) save_alt

This is some paranoid level of fuckery for some art porn... Shit.

>>58290
Not surprising, considering the potential money these artists can make on their art - lots of things are possible when they start seeing dollar signs.

No one will ever get around it without severely destroying or distorting the image because of the layered stenography. It's not autistic, its effective. Your best option is to somehow find some backdoor into the website, or exploit to get the source .psd files it edits to create each image. The artist is basically sacrificing their art looking consistent for security. I imagine its a simple as fuck program you could make in a day that just reads a .psd and moves certain designated layers within a predetermined margin, and the exact amount layers are moved is based on some algorithm where a user id is inputted. I'm tempted to make my own and market it to a slightly different audience.

>>58488
I'm about 95% certain that someone manually inputs the values. I'm not certain if they use that kind of stenography for other artists because of the amount of work involved in it. Each individual element has to be moved around, meaning that instead of just drawing the panels, Sef basically has to draw the entire character, or at least much more than is visible in any individual panel, and then add it as its own layer like someone building an animation in Flash. That's an incredible amount of extra work.

Sef said back before she even joined primeleap that she was doing '50 hours weeks' on the comic, and she was only putting out a single page. Doesn't make any sense unless she's drawing literally every single panel as its own image and then resizing it. Most artists aren't that sheerly autistic.

Best bet would be to get two accounts and compare images. If the images show no positional differences, then the regular passes of wiping out the superficial stenography with blurring/degaussing/whatever else would be enough to leak. It does significantly degrade the image though.

It would be extremely lolworthy if the autists in charge of primeleap left some easy access to their psd files or whatever. But another way to really fucking mess with them would be to somehow find their USER DISTRIBUTION FILES. As in, the post-stenographied files. If you leak files that you stole from someone else distribution, their images get leaked, primeleap bans the wrong person, and the entire site starts to get fucked. You wouldn't even need to find access to their original content files.

>>58488
All stegos can be broken though, since stego already destroy the original image's integrity ("wholeness") any other stego removal technics would not lead to quality loss as far as the original stego can go.

>>58502
Adversarial Moderation is fun too. If they automate the process it will be really easy to destroy the system in its root.

>>58743
You are thinking about 2d stego when this is more like 3d stego. The stego is done by moving around layers which can be considered a 3d space and then it is flattened into a 2d object. The identification comes by comparing the changes between what the unstegoed image would like and what the stegoed image looks like. With this method, you can even set up certain constraints that would make identification very easy, even using approximate coordinates of elements that are being moved. There is no noise filter that would defeat this type of stego. The only thing you can go to defeat this stego is severely warp the image itself to make even approximate identification hard.

There is no quality lost with this type of stego because nothing extra is being baked into the image with this method. The only risk is that if the wrong elements, such as layers making up a body in an image, get moved around too much, it can make it look anatomically fucked.

Now, I have a good hunch that animations do not use this type of stego, and instead use 2d stego in some of the frames, which can be broken with simple noise filters.

>>58969
>The stego is done by moving around layers which can be considered a 3d space and then it is flattened into a 2d object.
>There is no noise filter that would defeat this type of stego

>>58972
Right on.

You can't press buttons to filter this kind of stuff out, you gotta blur the pic a shit ton. But if you do that, what will you even see left?

>>58993
Even blurring wouldn't work because the positions of the moved elements would still be visible. There are definitely ways this can be applied to animations and they'd be an absolute nightmare to work around, to the point of being almost impossible to remove.

>>59006
>Even blurring wouldn't work because the positions of the moved elements would still be visible

What makes you think blurring wouldn't confound the positioning on the pixel level?

>>59065
Common sense?

Blurring does literally nothing to change the position of elements. You could blur something down to blobs and shapes and you could still figure out the position of the moving elements.

>>59113
>Common sense?
No:

>You could blur something down to blobs and shapes and you could still figure out the position of the moving elements.
To what degree of precision, as the element loses definition? If blurring ends up adding a few pixels to the element, its midpoint (and therefore its position) changes compared to the unblurred element otherwise at the same position.

>>59193
If you're 'blurring' something to the point that clearly defined elements become blurry and indistinct 'to a few pixels' then you have thoroughly ruined the image and ruined the point of leaking it. And I don't even mean 'this image quality is degraded' I mean 'this image is now a rorschach test'.

>>59227
"blurring" is not the word here, re-rendering would be closer, where the least-significant bit of each pixel would be used to store the data. If we scramble it, the pixels are not ruined from a human perspective since it does not change the overall color but the data would be lost.

All I see is more excuses to do nothing as it's so hopeless.

If there's no not getting banned, then accept it and use new accounts?

> All I see is more excuses to do nothing as it's so hopeless.

if you are pissing into a river, then it is more difficult for those downstream to filter out the urine than it is for you to add it to the river


> If there's no not getting banned, then accept it and use new accounts?

I think they will guess a very simple way to complicate this, too. There are four possible ways and each of them will make it extremely costly. I will not list these methods here, so as not to give them new ideas. But there are some ways.
And this will again return everyone to point: piss into the river is always easier than filtering the urine.

>>59227
>If you're 'blurring' something to the point that clearly defined elements become blurry and indistinct 'to a few pixels'
>If
It doesn't take much blurring to spread the element's pixels into its surroundings, creating those "few pixels" I talked about.

>>59252
>>59253
>>58207

fuckin_genius.png (153.9KiB, 1002x806) save_alt

From what I see here a light touch de-noising algorithm would remove the two most obvious forms of encryption without effecting quality all that much

>>59700
umm what distro is that

File