The Missing Layer in Content Authenticity

When I was a teenager writing metallica-esque guitar music, I read about a trick somewhere. Print out the tablature, mail it to yourself, keep the sealed envelope. The post office timestamp proves when you created it. Poor man's copyright.

I have no idea where that envelope is now. Probably thrown out. The proof existed. Now it's just a distant, foggy memory.

That's the content authenticity problem in miniature. Establishing provenance is only half the battle. The other half is making sure that proof survives.

UNICEF just reported that 1.2 million children disclosed having their images manipulated into deepfakes in the past year. That's one in 25 kids in some countries. In 2022, Europol warned that up to 90% of online content could be synthetic by 2026. Recent data suggests we're getting close - 74% of new web pages now contain AI-generated content. Whether we hit 90% exactly matters less than the direction we're heading.

The trust crisis is in full swing and the infrastructure being built to fight it has a gap.

C2PA is real progress

The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity has built something that matters. Content Credentials are like nutrition labels for digital media: who created it, what tools were used, what edits were made. The standard is backed by Adobe, Microsoft, Google, Meta, OpenAI, and the BBC. The Content Authenticity Initiative now has over 6,000 members and just marked its fifth year.

Even though it has strong cryptographic foundations, there is still something missing.

Content Credentials work when the metadata stays attached to the file. The problem is it usually doesn't.

Most social platforms strip metadata on upload. Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube. Tim Bray, a veteran software engineer, put it directly: "Nearly every online photo is delivered either via social media or by professional publishing software. In both cases, the metadata is routinely stripped, bye-bye C2PA."

An AI company engineer who implemented C2PA told the World Privacy Forum: "The common practice of removing metadata from media files when they are uploaded or shared is the primary obstacle to C2PA interoperability."

C2PA's answer is "soft bindings." Watermarks and fingerprints that link stripped content back to a manifest stored somewhere else. But that "somewhere else" is the problem.

Verification services aren't permanent

The C2PA ecosystem depends on manifest repositories and verification services. When those go offline, the provenance goes with them.

This isn't hypothetical. Hacker Factor reported that Microsoft's Content Integrity verification service went offline: "Now you just see a login page that doesn't even work for logging in." Truepic, a C2PA steering committee member, has produced inconsistent validation results, marking images signed by Microsoft Designer as unverified.

When multiple verification services disagree or disappear, what happens to the provenance?

Even the Content Authenticity Initiative acknowledges soft bindings have limits. From their blog: "Fingerprint retrieval is fuzzy. Matches cannot be made with perfect certainty."

C2PA solves "how do we prove provenance." but it doesn't solve "will that proof still exist when we need it." Provenance needs to live somewhere permanent, not dependent on any single service staying up.

Permanent storage is the fix

The C2PA Implementation Guidance actually acknowledges this. From the specification: "Distributed Ledger Technologies may be used to underwrite the integrity of a manifest repository... stored immutably within a DLT... to prove that the manifest has not been altered, or deleted."

They're describing permanent storage.

A complete content authenticity stack needs immutable storage where manifests can't be modified, deleted, or held hostage. It needs distributed verification through multiple independent access points, durable identifiers that survive platform changes, and economics that don't create fragility.

The technology for this exists. Arweave provides permanent storage with an endowment model designed for 200+ year persistence. The ar.io network adds distributed access through hundreds of independent gateways with built-in cryptographic verification.

How it would work

It's straightforward in how it works. Content gets created. C2PA credentials attached. The manifest gets stored on permanent infrastructure. Not just uploaded, but genuinely immutable.

Soft bindings point to that permanent record. Metadata gets stripped on social media, but the original provenance still exists. Platform shuts down or verification service goes offline - other gateways can still verify or you could even follow the open source verification protocols and do it yourself.

---

In the end, we're not talking about replacing C2PA. The standard is solid. We're talking about completing it.

My envelope is probably gone but Content Credentials stored on permanent infrastructure won't be.

Durable Content Credentials are only as durable as where you store them. If you're working on this problem, I want to hear from you.