What systems of robust steganography are out there?What makes LSBit steganography detectable? And what would help in concealing it?Are there any practical methods of steganography?In English, are there any words which encrypt to other words under the Caesar Cipher?What is the role of steganography in network security?
What is the most efficient algorithm to compute polynomial coefficients from its roots?
VBA Debugging - step through main program, but run routines called from it?
How is the entropy at the time of the Big Bang calculated?
How did my photos get transferred to my new iPhone even though they weren't in iCloud?
Can you make tandoori rotis with chickpea / green pea flour?
Is it a good idea to contact a candidate?
How to avoid answering "what were you sick with"?
Does anyone know who created or where this He-Man and Battlecat image came from?
Fantasy story about a knife that can cut holes to other dimensions
To Be or Not to Be?
Can dual US-Canadian citizens travel to the US with an expired US passport but valid Canadian passport?
In Fischer-Petrosian 1971 game 7, why did Fischer give up his good knight for a bad bishop?
Was the whistle-blower's (12 Aug 2019) complaint deemed credible?
An employer is trying to force me to switch banks, which I know is illegal. What should I do?
Short story trilogy about a human whose parents were missionaries to a planet of cat people
How do I obtain the debian-installer for Ubuntu Server 18.04.3 LTS?
Why do we have 0.0 and -0.0 in Ruby?
Why was Wouter Basson never charged with crimes against humanity for Project Coast?
How do I most effectively serve as group treasurer?
How many 1/day spells can a Warlock monster cast?
How to get out of the Ice Palace in Zelda A link to the Past?
Why does the single dot entry exist in file systems?
Swap M-x and M-q
Is there any verse in the Rig Veda Samhita that says only Indra existed before creation?
What systems of robust steganography are out there?
What makes LSBit steganography detectable? And what would help in concealing it?Are there any practical methods of steganography?In English, are there any words which encrypt to other words under the Caesar Cipher?What is the role of steganography in network security?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
By robust, I mean resistant to common image transforms (reversal, crop a non-multiple of 8 pixels off and recompress, blur, solarize to 64 levels, then interpolate, and sharpen, change compression levels, optimize for download, scale...
Suppose you are trying to embed ownership/copyright info in an image. How do you do so in a way that survives all of the above singly or in combination? And has sufficient parameters that it is non-obvious that it has been done.
You need to build in a lot of redundancy, and error correction systems. But that is short of workable system.
Ideally such a system is somewhat holographic in that other systems could also put data into an image, without compromising the original data.
Edit: While the use mention is one similar to watermarking, I normally consider a watermark to be visible in the image. Digital rights management has the addition of having various hidden attributes/data.
This came up in a discussion about Facebook putting tracking codes in images. In their case using an uncommonly used metadata field. So take it a step further: Can you put data into an image that is not readily recoverable without knowing a bunch of specific additional information, and that is proof against normal image operations.
Keeping the data secret is easy. Encrypt before encoding the ciphertext into the image. Keeping the data recoverable is harder. I'm inquiring about the latter.
steganography
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
By robust, I mean resistant to common image transforms (reversal, crop a non-multiple of 8 pixels off and recompress, blur, solarize to 64 levels, then interpolate, and sharpen, change compression levels, optimize for download, scale...
Suppose you are trying to embed ownership/copyright info in an image. How do you do so in a way that survives all of the above singly or in combination? And has sufficient parameters that it is non-obvious that it has been done.
You need to build in a lot of redundancy, and error correction systems. But that is short of workable system.
Ideally such a system is somewhat holographic in that other systems could also put data into an image, without compromising the original data.
Edit: While the use mention is one similar to watermarking, I normally consider a watermark to be visible in the image. Digital rights management has the addition of having various hidden attributes/data.
This came up in a discussion about Facebook putting tracking codes in images. In their case using an uncommonly used metadata field. So take it a step further: Can you put data into an image that is not readily recoverable without knowing a bunch of specific additional information, and that is proof against normal image operations.
Keeping the data secret is easy. Encrypt before encoding the ciphertext into the image. Keeping the data recoverable is harder. I'm inquiring about the latter.
steganography
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
3
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
2
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
4
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
By robust, I mean resistant to common image transforms (reversal, crop a non-multiple of 8 pixels off and recompress, blur, solarize to 64 levels, then interpolate, and sharpen, change compression levels, optimize for download, scale...
Suppose you are trying to embed ownership/copyright info in an image. How do you do so in a way that survives all of the above singly or in combination? And has sufficient parameters that it is non-obvious that it has been done.
You need to build in a lot of redundancy, and error correction systems. But that is short of workable system.
Ideally such a system is somewhat holographic in that other systems could also put data into an image, without compromising the original data.
Edit: While the use mention is one similar to watermarking, I normally consider a watermark to be visible in the image. Digital rights management has the addition of having various hidden attributes/data.
This came up in a discussion about Facebook putting tracking codes in images. In their case using an uncommonly used metadata field. So take it a step further: Can you put data into an image that is not readily recoverable without knowing a bunch of specific additional information, and that is proof against normal image operations.
Keeping the data secret is easy. Encrypt before encoding the ciphertext into the image. Keeping the data recoverable is harder. I'm inquiring about the latter.
steganography
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
$endgroup$
By robust, I mean resistant to common image transforms (reversal, crop a non-multiple of 8 pixels off and recompress, blur, solarize to 64 levels, then interpolate, and sharpen, change compression levels, optimize for download, scale...
Suppose you are trying to embed ownership/copyright info in an image. How do you do so in a way that survives all of the above singly or in combination? And has sufficient parameters that it is non-obvious that it has been done.
You need to build in a lot of redundancy, and error correction systems. But that is short of workable system.
Ideally such a system is somewhat holographic in that other systems could also put data into an image, without compromising the original data.
Edit: While the use mention is one similar to watermarking, I normally consider a watermark to be visible in the image. Digital rights management has the addition of having various hidden attributes/data.
This came up in a discussion about Facebook putting tracking codes in images. In their case using an uncommonly used metadata field. So take it a step further: Can you put data into an image that is not readily recoverable without knowing a bunch of specific additional information, and that is proof against normal image operations.
Keeping the data secret is easy. Encrypt before encoding the ciphertext into the image. Keeping the data recoverable is harder. I'm inquiring about the latter.
steganography
steganography
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
edited Jul 16 at 20:07
Sherwood Botsford
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
asked Jul 15 at 0:44
Sherwood BotsfordSherwood Botsford
1966 bronze badges
1966 bronze badges
4
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
3
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
2
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
4
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00
|
show 2 more comments
4
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
3
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
2
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
4
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00
4
4
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
3
3
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
1
1
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
2
2
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
4
4
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00
|
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The field of research that deals with robustness is watermarking. There are hundreds of techniques to deal with the different existing attacks (resize, crop, recompress, etc).
Currently there is no system that overcomes all possible attacks. But there are some approaches that solve a lot of attacks under certain circumstances.
For example, this is a classic paper for solving RST (Rotation, Scale, Translation) attacks.
But I think the most robust current methods are based on zero-bit schemes. Check, for example, this paper.
I suggest that you define the most important attacks for your application, and try to find papers that deal with these attacks. But it is quite complicated to implement these techniques for non-experts in the field.
The alternative is to try to deal with the different attacks by using simple techniques. For example, use a copy of the original image for mark extraction. This keeps things easy.
Use a DCT transform of the image. Then hide information by modifying the DCT coefficients. You can recover the original DCT coefficients from the original image and the mark from the differences between the original and the marked image.
This resists the resizing process to some degree. If the user makes a crop, use the original image to find the same crop in the original image. Then you can recover the mark as before. The same procedure can be used to deal with rotation.
This approach has many problems, but it provides you with an easy starting point.
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "281"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f71945%2fwhat-systems-of-robust-steganography-are-out-there%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The field of research that deals with robustness is watermarking. There are hundreds of techniques to deal with the different existing attacks (resize, crop, recompress, etc).
Currently there is no system that overcomes all possible attacks. But there are some approaches that solve a lot of attacks under certain circumstances.
For example, this is a classic paper for solving RST (Rotation, Scale, Translation) attacks.
But I think the most robust current methods are based on zero-bit schemes. Check, for example, this paper.
I suggest that you define the most important attacks for your application, and try to find papers that deal with these attacks. But it is quite complicated to implement these techniques for non-experts in the field.
The alternative is to try to deal with the different attacks by using simple techniques. For example, use a copy of the original image for mark extraction. This keeps things easy.
Use a DCT transform of the image. Then hide information by modifying the DCT coefficients. You can recover the original DCT coefficients from the original image and the mark from the differences between the original and the marked image.
This resists the resizing process to some degree. If the user makes a crop, use the original image to find the same crop in the original image. Then you can recover the mark as before. The same procedure can be used to deal with rotation.
This approach has many problems, but it provides you with an easy starting point.
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
The field of research that deals with robustness is watermarking. There are hundreds of techniques to deal with the different existing attacks (resize, crop, recompress, etc).
Currently there is no system that overcomes all possible attacks. But there are some approaches that solve a lot of attacks under certain circumstances.
For example, this is a classic paper for solving RST (Rotation, Scale, Translation) attacks.
But I think the most robust current methods are based on zero-bit schemes. Check, for example, this paper.
I suggest that you define the most important attacks for your application, and try to find papers that deal with these attacks. But it is quite complicated to implement these techniques for non-experts in the field.
The alternative is to try to deal with the different attacks by using simple techniques. For example, use a copy of the original image for mark extraction. This keeps things easy.
Use a DCT transform of the image. Then hide information by modifying the DCT coefficients. You can recover the original DCT coefficients from the original image and the mark from the differences between the original and the marked image.
This resists the resizing process to some degree. If the user makes a crop, use the original image to find the same crop in the original image. Then you can recover the mark as before. The same procedure can be used to deal with rotation.
This approach has many problems, but it provides you with an easy starting point.
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
The field of research that deals with robustness is watermarking. There are hundreds of techniques to deal with the different existing attacks (resize, crop, recompress, etc).
Currently there is no system that overcomes all possible attacks. But there are some approaches that solve a lot of attacks under certain circumstances.
For example, this is a classic paper for solving RST (Rotation, Scale, Translation) attacks.
But I think the most robust current methods are based on zero-bit schemes. Check, for example, this paper.
I suggest that you define the most important attacks for your application, and try to find papers that deal with these attacks. But it is quite complicated to implement these techniques for non-experts in the field.
The alternative is to try to deal with the different attacks by using simple techniques. For example, use a copy of the original image for mark extraction. This keeps things easy.
Use a DCT transform of the image. Then hide information by modifying the DCT coefficients. You can recover the original DCT coefficients from the original image and the mark from the differences between the original and the marked image.
This resists the resizing process to some degree. If the user makes a crop, use the original image to find the same crop in the original image. Then you can recover the mark as before. The same procedure can be used to deal with rotation.
This approach has many problems, but it provides you with an easy starting point.
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
The field of research that deals with robustness is watermarking. There are hundreds of techniques to deal with the different existing attacks (resize, crop, recompress, etc).
Currently there is no system that overcomes all possible attacks. But there are some approaches that solve a lot of attacks under certain circumstances.
For example, this is a classic paper for solving RST (Rotation, Scale, Translation) attacks.
But I think the most robust current methods are based on zero-bit schemes. Check, for example, this paper.
I suggest that you define the most important attacks for your application, and try to find papers that deal with these attacks. But it is quite complicated to implement these techniques for non-experts in the field.
The alternative is to try to deal with the different attacks by using simple techniques. For example, use a copy of the original image for mark extraction. This keeps things easy.
Use a DCT transform of the image. Then hide information by modifying the DCT coefficients. You can recover the original DCT coefficients from the original image and the mark from the differences between the original and the marked image.
This resists the resizing process to some degree. If the user makes a crop, use the original image to find the same crop in the original image. Then you can recover the mark as before. The same procedure can be used to deal with rotation.
This approach has many problems, but it provides you with an easy starting point.
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
edited Jul 15 at 17:31
Patriot
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
1,5882 gold badges7 silver badges31 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
answered Jul 15 at 8:47
Daniel LerchDaniel Lerch
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
5013 silver badges5 bronze badges
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
add a comment
|
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
2
2
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
$begingroup$
A watermark is a piece of information. Sometimes information is measured in bits. Can you give any indications of the number of bits a watermark can contain, and remain 'robust'? It's ratio to the host image must be quite low..?
$endgroup$
– Paul Uszak
Jul 15 at 11:05
2
2
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
$begingroup$
@PaulUszak A watermark generally must contain enough information to be unique. This could range from anywhere between 8 and 64 bits, depending on how many images need to be watermarked. They need only to be identifiers that an external database will map to more detailed information.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 16 at 7:28
2
2
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
$begingroup$
@forest they also must contain enough information that they can be distinguished from non-watermarks - i.e. be collision resistant.
$endgroup$
– Stop Harming Monica
Jul 16 at 12:53
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Cryptography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f71945%2fwhat-systems-of-robust-steganography-are-out-there%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
$begingroup$
You're probably going to need to place a limit on the amount of malleability that the scheme must support; It's clearly impossible for it to support truly arbitrary transformations (e.g. zeroing the pixels out, truncating the image completely, etc). Defining that limit that may be challenging, ideally someone else has already done so already and published the result - speaking of, have you tried looking for any pre-existing results in this area?
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Jul 15 at 1:28
3
$begingroup$
How much data do you need to encode, and how stealthy does it need to be? An extreme example would be reducing the brightness the image by 90% to encode a binary 1, and increasing the brightness of the image by 90% to encode a binary 0. That would encode a single bit and would survive nearly any transformation.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 6:11
1
$begingroup$
@forest Some "artistic" filters would still be able to muck that one up, e.g. ones that make an outline of the image :) Ella is right, without boundaries this question cannot be answered. And with specific boundaries this becomes more of a personal consultancy, as it would only benefit this one usage.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 8:37
2
$begingroup$
@MaartenBodewes You're right, and you could probably make it more robust by applying the inverse transformation to one half of the image, but it would still be theoretically possible to erase.
$endgroup$
– forest
Jul 15 at 8:38
4
$begingroup$
Looking up on Google search is that most articles talk about steganography and watermarking, so although you've tagged and titled your question steganography, it seems that your use case is specificly about watermarking, which is related to but doesn't seem to be part of steganography.
$endgroup$
– Maarten Bodewes♦
Jul 15 at 9:00