This free font can trick AI scrapers into swallowing gibberish instead of your content

zohaibahd

Posts: 980   +19
Staff
The big picture: Putting your writing on the open web used to mean people could read it. Now, it also means dozens of crawlers can copy it into training datasets. Sure, anti-scraping tools such as robots.txt exist, but they only work if the bots themselves agree to stay away, which doesn't always happen. Stricter measures were clearly needed, and now they have arrived in an innovative new form.

A Brazilian creative studio called Seneda & Abrucio has teamed up with Playtype, a Copenhagen-based type foundry, to build something that doesn't rely on asking nicely to keep crawlers away. They call it ShieldFont, and it's essentially a free, open-source web font with a twist. It works by showing you one sentence while presenting an AI scraper with a completely different one.

The thing is, you see rendered pixels on a screen. Most mass scrapers, on the other hand, simply grab the raw HTML underneath. ShieldFont exploits this difference through an automated process called OpenType glyph substitution. This technology is normally used to replace one or more typed characters with alternate glyphs that improve how text is rendered. In this case, however, entire words are swapped out, meaning a scraper can pick up only gibberish from the webpage.

Those swapped words are not picked at random, however. The studio's dictionary pairs every word with another of the same grammatical type, so nouns get nouns and past-tense verbs get past-tense verbs. The words are sorted into roughly 250 pools that account for factors such as whether a noun is abstract or plural. About a quarter of the words in any given block are swapped this way.

Keeping the grammar clean matters because AI firms run scraped text through quality filters that discard anything that reads like nonsense. Seneda & Abrucio ran shielded text through FineWeb-Edu, a quality filter used to assemble a large public training dataset, and found that about one in 10 passages that passed before shielding still passed afterward.

Whatever gets through is fluent enough to be retained yet wrong enough to be useless at the same time. In fact, 55.8% of shielded passages in the studio's testing no longer made the original factual claim.

That said, because the whole defense rests on scrapers reading code rather than screens, taking a screenshot of a shielded page and running OCR on the image can still recover the real words. Screen readers used by blind readers also work from the code, so they read the decoys aloud. ShieldFont ships with a beta feature that provides those readers with the real text instead.

For now, ShieldFont only handles English. The code can be found on GitHub for anyone who wants it. Developers and writers can simply install it as a React component to their websites.

Permalink to story:

 
I'm offering a service to AI companies called the "read my crap" program, that will undo anti AI actions, for just $199 per month per site. What a steal!

Corporations are encouraged to sign long term deals now, due to Textpocalypse and a shortage of ****s to give, the price will continue to increase due to ever tightening supply issues.
 
... poison to them
This is preposterous and sad at the same time.
There are plenty of tools (e.g. HTML Guardian) that can obfuscate the source and make it unreadable to scrapers.

The purpose here is not to protect your content, but to deliberately inject nonsense in the training data - which may potentially result in lower quality misleading results for all the people in the world, because everyone now uses AI, even those foaming against it every day.
That is, we have an openly malicious intent. Praising it with such enthusiasm seems odd, to put it mildly.

It's really sad the people can be so vile, no matter how ridiculous and easy to circumvent the implementation is.
 
I suppose the beta is alright when used in combination with a robots.txt.
If the AI-scraper ignores the robots.txt then it's on themselves for taking in poisoned data.

If you're not using the beta and just poisoning your data so AI models get worse you're a bigger menace than the AI-folks. Malicious behavior at the cost of being accessible to those with impairments having to use screen readers and such.
 
This is preposterous and sad at the same time.
There are plenty of tools (e.g. HTML Guardian) that can obfuscate the source and make it unreadable to scrapers.

The purpose here is not to protect your content, but to deliberately inject nonsense in the training data - which may potentially result in lower quality misleading results for all the people in the world, because everyone now uses AI, even those foaming against it every day.
That is, we have an openly malicious intent. Praising it with such enthusiasm seems odd, to put it mildly.

It's really sad the people can be so vile, no matter how ridiculous and easy to circumvent the implementation is.
I suppose the beta is alright when used in combination with a robots.txt.
If the AI-scraper ignores the robots.txt then it's on themselves for taking in poisoned data.

If you're not using the beta and just poisoning your data so AI models get worse you're a bigger menace than the AI-folks. Malicious behavior at the cost of being accessible to those with impairments having to use screen readers and such.
AI billionaires have no right to my data. If they don't want to pay for it, they get poison.

AI billionaires are not some child begging for food. We don't need to simp.for them. If they pay for the data, they are allowed to use it.
 
AI billionaires have no right to my data.
If you place that data on a public server, where web scrapers can get to it, they do. Copyright law isn't unlimited, and data itself cannot be copyrighted:



If you wish to keep your data a trade secret, you have a simple recourse: don't publish it to the Internet.
 
AI billionaires have no right to my data. If they don't want to pay for it, they get poison.

AI billionaires are not some child begging for food. We don't need to simp.for them. If they pay for the data, they are allowed to use it.
That's why I said if they ignore robots.txt.
Every site should have a robots.txt, and to it you can add some lines you can find over here:

If you haven't told the bots to bugger off and immediately start poisoning which simultaneously makes your site inaccessible to legit users with impairments then imo you're a bit of a loon.
 
AI billionaires have no right to my data. If they don't want to pay for it, they get poison.

AI billionaires are not some child begging for food. We don't need to simp.for them. If they pay for the data, they are allowed to use it.
It won't be "AI billionaires" getting the poison.
If we imagine a parallel universe where this stupidity works, it would be the LLM users (which means everybody) getting the poison.

It's probably not easy to be drowning in hatred and envy, try to do something about it.
 
Back