Professional Documents
Culture Documents
F5 Steganographic Algorithm-Karthik
F5 Steganographic Algorithm-Karthik
A STEGANOGRAPHIC ALGORITHM
- ANDREAS WESTFELD
TOPICS DISCUSSED
STEGANOGRAPHY OVERVIEW
JPEG FILE INTERCHANGE FORMAT
JSTEG ALGORITHM
F3 ALGORITHM
F4 ALGORITHM
F5 ALGORITHM AND ITS ADVANTAGES
OVER OTHER ALGORITHMS
F5 ALGORITHM DEMO
STEGANOGRAPHY
OVERVIEW
SECRET
MESSAGE
Steganograph
y
Decryption
algorithm
CARRIER
No visible changes in
image steganogram
Must resist Visual
and Statistical
Attacks
High Capacity for
Secret Message
CARRIER
After quantization, JSTEG replaces the least significant bits of the frequency coefficients by the
secret message. The embedding mechanism skips all coefficients with the values 0 or 1 as
observed in Figure 3b.
Resistant against visual attacks and offers a good capacity of about 12.8% of the staganograms
size, but the secret message can be easily detected by statistical attacks.
Fig 4 shows the statistical attack on JSTEG steganogram (with 50% of the capacity used, i.e.
7680 bytes). The diagram presents the probability of embedding: as a function of an increasing
sample: Initially, the sample comprises the first 1% of the JPEG coefficients, then the first 2%,
3%, . . . The probability is 1.00 up to 54% and 0.45 at 56%; A sample of 59% and more contains
enough unchanged coefficients to let the p-value drop to 0.00.
F3 Steganographic Algorithm
(1)
F3 Steganographic Algorithm
(2)
Does not overwrite bits like JSTEG, instead it decrements the coefficients absolute values in case
their LSB does not match except coefficients with the value zero, where we cannot decrement
the absolute value. Hence zero coefficient is not used in this method. The LSB of nonzero
coefficients match the secret message after embedding, but the LSB is not overwritten as
overwritten bits can be detected by statistical methods (Chi-Square method).
Some embedded bits fall victim to shrinkage. Shrinkage occurs every time F3 decrements the
absolute value of 1 and -1 producing a 0. The receiver cannot distinguish a 0 coefficient that is
stegonagraphically unused from a 0 produced by shrinkage. It skips all zero coefficients. Hence
repetitive embedding is necessary.
Figure 5b shows the histogram of frequence of occurance versus JPE G coefficients for after
applying F3 algorithm. The histogram shows more even coefficients than odd coefficients. This is
due to repeated embedding after shrinkage. Shrinkage occurs only if we embed a 0 bit. The
repetition of these 0 bits shifts the ratio of steganographic values in favour of the steganographic
zeros. This is undesirable and can be detected by statistical means.
F3 WEAKNESSES:
Due to exclusive shrinkage of steganographic zeros. F3 embeds more zeros than ones, and
produces statistically detectable peculiarities in the in the histogram.
The histogram of Figure 2 contains more odd than even coefficients (except 0). Therefore, an
unchanged carrier media contain more steganographic ones than zeros.
F4 Steganographic Algorithm
(1)
F4 Steganographic Algorithm
(2)
F4 WEAKNESSES:
For a very short secret message comprising of 217 byes (1736 bits), F4
changes 1157 places. This is shows that the number of bits changed is
significantly more which is not a good feature for attack proof
steganographic algorithm. A new mechanism is required to decrease the
number of bit changes.
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(1)
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(2)
CONTINUOUS EMBEDDING PROBLEM:
In most of the cases, an embedded message does not require full capacity. Hence a
part of the file
remains unused. Figure 7 shows this concept of continuous embedding used by
algorithm like F4.
Figure 7 shows that the changes (x) concentrate on the start of the file, and unused
rest resides on
the end. To prevent attacks, the embedding function should use the carrier medium as
regularly as
possible. The embedding density must be same everywhere.
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(3)
PERMUTATIVE STRADDLING:
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(4)
MATRIX ENCODING BY RON CRANDALL:
EXAMPLE:
F4
1157
1157bits
bits
changed
changed
Message
Messagewith
with
1736
1736bits
bits
F5
459
459bits
bitschanged
changed
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(5)
MATRIX ENCODING IMPLEMENTATION:
General case: If we have a code word a with n modifiable bit places for
k secret message bits x, Matrix encoding technique embeds k secret
message bits by changing one of n= 2^k-1 places.
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(6)
PRESERVING CHARACTERSITIC PROPERTIES:
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(7)
F5 IMPLEMENTATION:
F5 Steganographic Algorithm
(8)
F5 Implementation Steps:
F5 ADVANTAGES
ANY QUESTIONS?
REFERENCES