Insights from Microsoft’s Media Integrity and Authentication: Status, Directions, and Futures report
It has become increasingly difficult to distinguish fact from fiction when viewing online images and videos. Resilient, trustworthy technologies can help people determine whether the content they are viewing was captured by a camera or microphone—or generated or modified by AI tools.
We refer to technologies aimed at helping viewers verify the source and history—that is, the provenance—of digital content as media integrity and authentication (MIA) methods. This technique, driven by the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (opens in new tab) (C2PA), a standards body dedicated to scaling these capabilities, as well as complementary methods such as watermarks and fingerprinting, have become critically important with the rapid advance of AI systems capable of creating, realistic imagery, video, and audio at scale.
A convergence of forces
Our team recognized an inflection point in the evolution of online content integrity, driven by the convergence of four forces:
- Growing saturation of synthetic media, driven by proliferation of high-fidelity content-generation tools and the explosion of AI generated or modified media online
- Forthcoming legislation both nationally and internationally seeking to define what “verifiable” provenance should mean in practice
- Mounting pressure on implementers to ensure authentication signals are clear and helpful, especially as signals increase when legislation goes into effect in 2026
- Heightened awareness of potential adversarial attacks that attempt to exploit weaknesses in authenticity systems
The usefulness and trustworthiness of provenance signals, whether certifying content as synthetic or as an authentic capture of real-world scenes, will depend not only on advances in technology, but also on how the broader digital ecosystem adopts, implements, and governs these tools. Aligning around implementation choices that promote consistency and clarity is essential to ensure transparency signals strengthen, rather than erode, public confidence.
To address these challenges, we launched a comprehensive evaluation of the real-world limits, edge cases, and emerging “attack surfaces” for MIA methods. Today, we are publishing our findings in the Media Integrity & Authentication: Status, Directions & Futures report. The report distills lessons learned and outlines practical directions for strengthening media integrity in the years ahead.
video series
On Second Thought
A video series with Sinead Bovell built around the questions everyone’s asking about AI. With expert voices from across Microsoft, we break down the tension and promise of this rapidly changing technology, exploring what’s evolving and what’s possible.
Findings and directions forward
Our research recognizes that different media integrity and authenticity methods serve differing purposes and offer distinct levels of protection. After defining each method in detail, we focused on secure provenance (C2PA), imperceptible watermarking, and soft hash fingerprinting across images, audio, and video.
Grounded in our evaluation of these MIA methods across modalities, attack categories, and real-world workflows, several new findings emerged including two new concepts:
- High-Confidence Provenance Authentication: a critical capability for verifying, under defined conditions, whether claims about the origin of and modifications made to an asset can be validated with high certainty.
- Sociotechnical Provenance Attacks: attacks aimed at deception and capable of inverting signals, making authentic content appear synthetic, and synthetic content appear authentic.
Drawing on our findings, we identified four promising directions for further strengthening media authentication, along with suggestions to support more effective implementation strategies and future decisions. We’ve summarized the findings and directions below, with additional detail available in the report.
| Promising directions | High-level findings |
|---|---|
| Delivering high-confidence provenance authentication | – Implementation and display choices may affect the reliability of provenance indicators and how they are interpreted by the public. – Using a C2PA provenance manifest for media created and signed in a high security environment enables high-confidence validation. – High-confidence validation is also possible across a broader volume of images, audio, and video when an imperceptible watermark is linked to C2PA provenance manifest as an additional layer to recover the provenance information if removed. – Fingerprinting is not an enabler for high-confidence validation and can involve significant costs when expected at scale. However, it can support manual forensics. |
| Mitigating confusion from sociotechnical provenance attacks | – MIA methods are susceptible to sociotechnical attacks on provenance that may mislead the public, resulting in confusion and misplaced trust about an asset’s provenance if there is an overreliance on low-quality signals. – Layering and linking secure provenance and imperceptible watermarking methods to achieve high confidence validation also offers a promising option to both deter and mitigate the impact of attacks. – Unintended consequences may result from the use of methods lacking authentication, such as the use of perceptible watermarks in the absence of secure provenance. Perceptible watermarks may cause confusion in cases of forgery or discourage people from consulting high-confidence provenance information via a validation tool, if such perceptible disclosures are taken at face value. – UX design that enables users to explore manifest details—such as where edits occurred or region of interest—has the potential to reduce confusion and support forensics and fact checking efforts. |
| Enabling more trusted provenance on edge devices | – High-confidence results aren’t feasible when provenance is added by a conventional offline device (e.g., camera or recording device without connectivity). – Implementing a secure enclave within the hardware layer of offline devices is essential to make the provenance of captured images, audio, and video more trustworthy. |
| Investing in ongoing research and policy development | – All three methods offer organizations valuable tools for addressing operational challenges such as fraud prevention, risk management, and digital accountability. – UX and display are promising directions for research. Important directions include in-stream tools that display provenance information where people are and distinguish between high- and lower-confidence provenance signals. – Stakeholders should conduct ongoing analysis and red teaming to identify and mitigate weaknesses through technical approaches, policies, and laws. |
The journey continues
This report marks the beginning of a new chapter in our media provenance journey (opens in new tab), building on years of foundational work, from developing the very first prototype in 2019 to co-founding the C2PA in 2021 and helping catalyze an ecosystem that has since grown to more than 6,000 members and affiliates (opens in new tab) supporting C2PA Content Credentials. This research represents the next evolution of that long‑standing commitment.
We hope that by sharing our learnings will help others prepare for an important wave, especially as generative technologies accelerate and provenance signals multiply. This work is already underway across our products at Microsoft. Together, these directions highlight opportunities for the ecosystem to align, harden, and innovate, so authentication signals are not merely visible, but robust, meaningful, and resilient throughout the content lifecycle.
Security, privacy, and cryptography