Those dots are practically invisible if you have the printed copy, they're not going to be visible at all in a photography. Printers and their network leave a lot to logs behind, pretty sure they just check up the printed files of their network, found the document and who send the printer order and done.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago (2 children)

So you think tracking her down with forensic methods that objectively exist is farfetched, but accessing the print logs of every printer in America to figure out which one printed the document is realistic?

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Every printer in America? She wasn't a random person accessing those documents in her local Starbucks. That was a secret document printed in a government computer.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's cheaper and easier to look at the print logs. Most business computer and printer solutions tie every print to a user and log at least the name of every document printed

The hidden code is for court cases where they wish to prove which machine made the print, they're not very good for identifying which user printed something in a multi user environment