skip to main content
10.1145/3082031.3083243acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesih-n-mmsecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Improving GFR Steganalysis Features by Using Gabor Symmetry and Weighted Histograms

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The GFR (Gabor Filter Residual) features, built as histograms of quantized residuals obtained with 2D Gabor filters, can achieve competitive detection performance against adaptive JPEG steganography. In this paper, an improved version of the GFR is proposed. First, a novel histogram merging method is proposed according to the symmetries between different Gabor filters, thus making the features more compact and robust. Second, a new weighted histogram method is proposed by considering the position of the residual value in a quantization interval, making the features more sensitive to the slight changes in residual values. The experiments are given to demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed methods.

References

  1. T. Denemark, M. Boroumand, and J. Fridrich. 2016. Steganal- ysis features for content-adaptive JPEG steganography. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 11, 8 (Au- gust 2016), 1736--1746.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. T. Filler, J. Judas, and J. Fridrich. 2011. Minimizing additive distortion in steganography using syndrome-trellis codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 6, 3 (Sep- tember 2011), 920--935. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. L. Guo, J. Ni, and Y. Q. Shi. 2014. Uniform embedding for efficient JPEG steganography. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 9, 5 (May 2014), 814--825. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. V. Holub and J. Fridrich. 2013. Random projections of residuals for digital image steganalysis. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 8, 12 (December 2013), 1996--2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. V. Holub and J. Fridrich. 2014. Challenging the doctrines of JPEG steganography. Proc. SPIE 9028 (2014), 902802-902802-8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. V. Holub and J. Fridrich. 2015. Low-complexity features for JPEG steganalysis using undecimated DCT. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 10, 2 (February 2015), 219--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. V. Holub and J. Fridrich. 2015. Phase-aware projection model for steganalysis of JPEG images. Proc. SPIE 9409 (2015), 94090T-94090T-11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. V. Holub, J. Fridrich, and T. Denemark. 2014. Universal distortion function for steganography in an arbitrary domain. EURASIP Journal on Information Security 2014, 1 (2014), 1-- 13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. A. D. Ker. 2014. Implementing the projected spatial rich features on a GPU. Proc. SPIE 9028 (2014), 90280K-90280K-10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. Kodovsky and J. Fridrich. 2012. Steganalysis of JPEG images using rich models. Proc. SPIE 8303 (2012), 83030A-83030A-13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. Kodovsky, J. Fridrich, and V. Holub. 2012. Ensemble classifiers for steganalysis of digital media. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 7, 2 (April 2012), 432--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. H. B. Mitchell and P. A. Schaefer. 2001. A soft K-nearest neighbor voting scheme. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 16, 4 (2001), 459--468.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. W. M. Pang, K. S. Choi, and J. Qin. 2016. Fast Gabor texture feature extraction with separable filters using GPU. Journal of Real-Time Image Processing 12, 1 (June 2016), 5--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Pevny and J. Fridrich. 2007. Merging Markov and DCT features for multi-class JPEG steganalysis. Proc. SPIE 6505 (2007), 650503--650503--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. X. Song, F. Liu, C. Yang, X. Luo, and Y. Zhang. 2015. Steganalysis of adaptive JPEG steganography using 2D Gabor filters. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on Information Hiding and Multimedia Security (IH&MMSec'15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 15--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. C. Xia, Q. Guan, X. Zhao, and C. Zhao. 2016. Highly accurate real-time image steganalysis based on GPU. Journal of Real-Time Image Processing (2016), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Improving GFR Steganalysis Features by Using Gabor Symmetry and Weighted Histograms

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IH&MMSec '17: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Workshop on Information Hiding and Multimedia Security
        June 2017
        180 pages
        ISBN:9781450350617
        DOI:10.1145/3082031

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 20 June 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        IH&MMSec '17 Paper Acceptance Rate18of34submissions,53%Overall Acceptance Rate128of318submissions,40%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader