SenseDefend

Synthetic-media instruments, by article and effective date

Microsoft Designer and SynthID on how wide a claim reaches

These are the narrowest and the widest scope claims in the record. The narrow one can be applied to a folder of files; the wide one cannot be applied to anything in particular. As of 2026-09-12.

The narrowest claim and the widest, side by sideOne claim is bounded by a named set of features, so a reader can sort their own files by it. The other spans a family of products with no product or version named, so it cannot be applied to anything in particular.Can a reader apply this claim to their own files?Bounded by a featureYesAsk which images came out of those featuresand the answer sorts the folderBounded by a product familyNoNo product names and no versions, so nothingto match a file againstBoth are provider-side answers, and neither reaches a viewer
Fig. 1 Both pages are honest: one about what it does not cover, the other about covering a great deal without saying where the edges are.
Microsoft Designer and Google SynthID on the same column, point by point. Recorded 2026-09-22 and 2026-09-12.
PointMicrosoft DesignerGoogle SynthID
How wide the claim isImages created with the named editing featuresAcross the vendor's generative consumer products
What a reader can do with itSort their own files by which feature made themLittle; no products or versions are named
What is outside itEverything else, and known to be outsideUnknown

Inclusion rule. Two entries whose published answers to one column pull in different directions. Cells hold each vendor's own wording from the page its entry names; pairs that agree on the column are not filed at all. Order. Fixed order, and the two columns are in the order the heading gives them.

1A boundary you can apply beats a boundary you cannot

Somebody holding a folder of assets can ask which came out of a named feature and get an answer. Nobody can ask which of their files came from the vendor's generative consumer products as a class.

That is not a failure of the wider claim. A layer applied beneath several products is the right shape for a duty addressed to whoever builds systems, and it is the wrong shape for sorting a delivery folder.

2Breadth is harder to verify from outside

A narrow claim can be tested by making a file with that feature and looking. A claim about a family of products cannot be tested at all without knowing which products and which versions are in scope.

Both pages are honest. One is honest about what it does not cover; the other is honest about covering a great deal and vague about where the edges are.

3Both are provider-side answers

Neither entry describes anything a viewer can see. Both disclosure rows record that nothing visible is described, which is the standard shape for entries whose answer is a signal or a manifest.

A publisher therefore gets the same thing from both: possible evidence about what a file contains, and no help at all with telling an audience anything.

  • Microsoft Designer (microsoft.com)
    Content credentials, provenance based on the C2PA standard, are applied to all images created with the editing featuresan image generation and editing toolMicrosoft Support, Designer FAQ / recorded 2026-09-22
  • SynthID
    An invisible watermark is embedded across Google's generative AI consumer products, added at the moment content is createdthe marking layer behind Google's video modelsGoogle DeepMind, SynthID / recorded 2026-09-12

4Sources

Read from the support FAQ at support.microsoft.com and the SynthID page at deepmind.google, consulted 2026-09-22 and 2026-09-12. Full entries: Microsoft Designer and Google SynthID. The column itself is on The fourth row. Other pairs on file: ElevenLabs and Sora, SynthID and SceneMixer.