Luckily we have open source firmware and we can build our own printers.
Most ghost guns are not 3D printed so this is nothing but security theater and an invasion of privacy.
Luckily we have open source firmware and we can build our own printers.
Most ghost guns are not 3D printed so this is nothing but security theater and an invasion of privacy.
Given the diy-nature of almost every 3d printer, I can't see this being very useful for identifying prints.
So when I turn on variable layer height this whole thing goes out the window. Or if I post process and sand the parts. Oh I know what if I use a slicer and firmware like klipper to bypass everything. No 3d printer that isn't locked down already by closed ecosystem will never have this "code" in the parts.
Sand paper wouldn't really help. They could just cut a part in half. But yeah no way in hell this will ever end up in any of the open source printer firmwares. So it's a moot point.
This has to be borderline useless as a positive identification tool, given that people can...
How about they just focus on other methods of apprehending violent criminals and leave hobbyists alone.
you know how easy it is to circumvent this?
relatively easy, its relatively easy. now you know.
Okay so if I want to print a gun I'll just tighten an eccentric nut or belt tensioner. Lol
Details on exactly how this is done are scarce, with Raviv saying it's accomplished through "mathematical contributions and new security mechanisms."
Sounds like a load of nonsense. They'd have to somehow get this code into your slicer.
2d printers already print yellow dots which contain information about the printer for tracking purposes.
The question isn't whether a manufacturer would play ball (or be compelled to) it's whether it's possible to do in a way where the information persists and doesn't compromise the functionality of the print.
I think it's bad, to be clear. I just think it's not unreasonable to imagine manufacturers including that capability from the factory.
Except 3d printing has a much bigger open source community than 2d printers have.
There's already software out there that can optimize the output file of a slicer - effectively rewriting the gcode. Removing any watermarks at the code level seems pretty trivial, even if every single slicer company relented and added this function
Presumably this would be handled by the printer firmware and just slightly change the extrusion rate, regardless of the gcode.
Easily solved by using open-source firmware.
And it all could be circumvented by sanding and just using the part to make molds for resin etc.
So if anyone anneals their part, this fingerprint goes away.
Seems similar to 2D printers. It shouldn't be that hard honestly. Sure, it's probably very prone to errors, but if it repeats over the entire print then the errors should average out.
I can see where the is going. In the future sanding your 3d part will be tantamount to removing the serial number on a gun.
I assume they add a custom wiggle to the print head so the "serial" is embedded into the plastic everywhere inside and out.
Exactly. So if that wiggle gets sanded off you have effectively anonymized your part
The wiggle isn't only on the surface. I'd bet it is everywhere except for the surface or users would complain about defects. So if you sand the surface, the forensics slices it in half and reads the wiggle that is embedded everywhere inside.
When the wiggle is inside the part the part will be gone after sanding it off.
If the 3D part was used to make a gun, isn't this a fair approach?
Why should I be prevented from manufacturing my own firearms? Gunsmithing is a perfectly legal hobby and I don't understand why new technology needs to change the laws. Just continue enforcing the manufacture of and sale of illegal weapons. My 20g shotgun had a little plastic bit crumble in the hard grip, should it have been illegal for me to 3d print it's replacement because it was involved in the manufacturing of a firearm?
Not all countries allow open ownership of weaponry. Most don't allow this kind of stuff.
I am most definitely opposed to randoms making modifications to their weapons even if they have licensing to own a firearms.
What is a modification? Is a new grip a mod? Putting on a rail to add other stuff, like flashlights?
How does your 3D printer know that the object it's printing is meant be part of a gun?
Impossible to deploy unless they force you to use their own slicer.
This would maybe make it a bit harder, but not by that much. Couldn't one just use the sanded-off 3D printed part as a template for a mould?
Guy at the home depot.... Is there any wroth iron pipe smaller than half inch available? And do you have it chrome plated?
Seriously 3D printing is overrated.
all 14 comments