When I've read the "hacked" headlines. I thought to myself "They couldn't have just highlighted it in black.. right?". Can't tell if incompetent or chaotic good.
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
173 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26816 readers
2864 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It feels like someone wanted this out and had to follow orders. If intentional, it's brilliant. If not, it's hilarious.
Believing that someone engaged in some malicious compliance here would restore a tiny sliver of my faith in humanity... which means it was probably just incompetence.
This has happened plenty of times before with redacted documents, someone just goes in, sets the highlighting tool to black, and uses it that way, without realizing that doesn’t actually obscure the words underneath like a sharpie would
Well, I don't think it's highlighted in black. They just changed the image or vector data without changing/removing the text data that sits separately but rendered on top of it.
so highlighted black…
No. Highlighting in black will still store the text vector data (usually). It will just appear as a black block.
Have you checked that they actually changed the vector data?
No
of course they goddamn did ahahah nobody can tell a single one of them "no," or "hey this isn't a good idea." they're all smart, duh.
Like the lady with whiteout in Erin Brockovich
I wish they had waited to mention it until after all the docs have been released.
“Hacks”
lol
Everyone who's ever used a WYSIWYG editor, putting on 90s sunglasses: "We're in!"
Yeah, this is an old problem with PDFs and some forms of Word documents. You could always go "Hey, show me the revisions!" and POOF! OG Document!
I had the benefit of running that on a business contract. "Hey, I wonder what all they changed on this before they sent it to us?"
It gave a fascinating insight into the things they WANTED in the contract but had to remove.
Not surprising. This has been a thing for quite some time, going back into the 2000s and 2010s.
You have a PDF file and you want to redact it. So you draw a black box over what you want to redact. Problem is, PDF works in layers. So you haven't actually blacked out the text, you have just drawn a black box over the text, which is still in the file. This makes it trivially easy for anyone with a PDF editor to simply delete the black box, or with a PDF viewer to just save the file as text and the black box will not be saved with it.
PDF software generally includes an actual redaction tool, which not only draws a black box but removes anything under it. However you have to know this tool exists and how to use it.
This interests me from illegal standpoint though. There are regulations governing what sort of things can and cannot be redacted. If things are being redacted for for political reasons, IE to avoid making Trump look bad, that is now quite easy to prove.
🤦
Somehow I suspected something like this could happen. These people are so dumb.