Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
126
CHAPTER 7
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
7.1 Introduction
An ideal Steganography technique embeds data into images in a way that forms
modified images which are visually imperceptible. As the application domain of
embedding data in image source becomes broaden, data hiding techniques are
designed in terms of security, capacity and imperceptibility. The performance of a
steganographic system can be measured using some properties of which the most
important property is the statistical undetectability of the data, which exhibits
difficulty in determining the existence of a hidden message. Another associated
measure is the steganographic capacity, where the maximum information can safely
embedded in a cover-image without having statistically detectable objects (Hamid et
al., 2013).
LSB based technique enables high capacity of data embedding and also maintaining
the visual perception of the stego-image. This method is probably the easiest way of
hiding information in an image and yet it is surprisingly effective (Johnson and
Jajodia, 1998). As stated by Jain et al., (2012b) LSB steganography is described as
follows: if the LSB of the pixel value I(i, j) is equal to the message bit m to be
embedded, I(i, j) remain unchanged; if not, set the LSB of I(i, j) to m. The message
embedding procedure is described using equation 7.1 as stated below,
(7.1)
where LSB(I(i, j)) stands for the LSB of I(i, j) of the cover-image, m is the bit to be
embedded and IS (i, j) is the pixel‟s LSB value of the stego-image.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
127
Such approach employs lossless compression in its mechanism that preserves the
quality and also increases the quantity of the secret data. LSB methods typically
achieve high capacity but unfortunately LSB insertion is vulnerable to attacks (Pujari
and Mukhopadhyay, 2012). In LSB steganography framework, the technique for
embedding the message may be known to an attacker and so it is generally not
considered as good practice to rely on the secrecy of the algorithm itself. The simple
LSB method can be enhanced with often much more sophisticated approach.
A digital image is defined as an arrangement of numbers and such numbers usually
stand for different light intensities in different parts of the image. In a color scheme,
the number of bits represents the bit depth and this basically refers to the number of
bits assigned to each pixel (Morkel et al., 2005).
Figure 7.1: RGB color space showing primary colors and gray value
The RGB (Red-Green-Blue) color model has three basic primary (basic) colors: red,
green and blue. All other colors are obtained by combining them (Carvajal-Gamez et
al., 2009; Kaur et al., 2010). In RGB color space, the colors with „P‟ are the primary
colors and the dashed line indicates where to find the grays, going from (0, 0, 0) to
(255, 255, 255) as shown in the figure 7.1. Images consist of pixels with contributions
from primary colors (red, green and blue) adding to the total color composition of the
pixel (Johnson and Jajodia, 1998). Each pixel typically has three numbers associated
with it, one each for red, green, and blue intensities, and these value ranges from 0-
255 (Gonzalez and Woods, 2002; Hosmer, 2006). Depending on the depth of color
desired in the final image, each component is represented by a separate number of
bits. When represented as decimal contributions, a value of (255, 0, 0) would describe
a 100% red pixel. By mixing the contribution of each component different colors can
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
128
be represented. Value mixtures such as (31, 187, 57) can result in a dark green while
(255, 255, 0) represents pure yellow.
(255, 255, 0) (254, 255, 0)
Figure 7.2: Red plane LSB Modification
When any specific color is viewed closely, single digit modifications to the
contribution level are imperceptible (i.e. a pixel with a value of (255, 255, 0) is
indistinguishable from (254, 255, 0)) as shown in figure 7.2 that illustrates the impact
of modifying one bit in the red contribution. One of the most important properties of
image based steganography is selecting of technique that can fulfill the basic
requirements in developing efficient steganographic process. If the LSB‟s of the red
plane is changed only, then such change does not have a noticeable impact on the
color of a pixel as seen in figure 7.2.
The LSB based data embedding can differ in the way of data hiding process and
different variations of LSB insertion exist. Information bits can be embedded in
image‟s LSB sequentially or randomly at fixed place or by random scattering
throughout the cover-image (Cheddad et al., 2009; Hamid et al., 2013). In the
sequential embedding scheme, the LSBs of the image are replaced by the message bit
sequentially (Tomar, 2012). Embedding depends on the length of the message and
thus the position of the pixel where the secret message is hidden is modified while the
rest remain untouched. But the disadvantage of sequential embedding is that the
message is encoded into the cover-image sequentially (ordered), so the clusters of bits
embedded can be found that results in abrupt changes in the bits statistics and this can
result in detection (Zhang et al., 2006).
For random case, there are no such clusters because the embedded bits are scattered
into the cover-image, so the detection process is not expected to be as effective as for
the sequential case. Randomizing the embedding process is one of the variations of
LSB approach where the secret bits can be placed into the pre-selected pixels of the
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
129
cover-image. Thus the bits of secret message bits will not be beside in one part, but
instead randomly dispersed throughout the image. In such embedding scheme, the
message bits are spread throughout the whole image using a random sequence to
control the embedding sequence (Hamid et al., 2013; Tomar, 2012). By randomizing
the embedding approach, the method to estimate the statistical properties of the image
used can be effectively disabled. Such approach of hiding in a randomized manner is
quite appealing and proves effective. In this process, a pseudorandom number
generator (PRNG) is used to select random pixels of the cover-image for hiding the
secret data. A chosen key can be inserted into a PRNG which will determine a
sequence of random numbers (Manchanda et al., 2007). These numbers indicate the
pixels in the cover-image where the LSBs are to be changed. In such case without the
secret key, it becomes significantly difficult for the attacker to figure out the target
pixels (Weng et al., 2009; Cole and Krutz, 2003). This makes the system more secure
because the receiver of the message must know the key in order to determine the
locations of the bits of the hidden message. So, in case the stego-image is known,
embedding the message in a random manner would not affect the security as long as
the stego-key remains unknown to the attacker. The secret key is the password used to
seed a pseudo-random number generator to select pixel locations in an image cover-
image for embedding the secret message.
Wu and Tsai, (2003), proposed a steganographic method based on pseudorandom
mechanism on gray-scale images by using pixel value differencing method where the
number of bits to be embedded in a pixel pair is decided by the difference value. The
PSNR value ranges from 40-47 dB for embedding average of 50960 bits. According
to Liang et al., (2007), pseudo-random based data embedding avoids concentration of
pixel alterations and ensures data security. They proposed a scheme that encodes the
secret bits directly into boundary pixels by checking each pixel of the cover image in
a pseudo-random order for embedding eligibility. Luo et al., (2010), proposed an edge
adaptive scheme which selects the embedding regions according to the size of secret
message and the difference between two consecutive pixels in the cover image
according to a pseudorandom number generator (PRNG). They stated that such
approach can resist both visual and statistical attacks and shows better PSNR value.
Jain et al., (2012b), presents random LSB based steganography where the edge pixels
were selected to hide the secret data. They stated that the selection of pixels for
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
130
embedding is crucial because modified pixels in areas of the image where there are
pixels that are most like their neighbors are much more noticeable to the naked eye
and to solve this problem edge pixel were randomly selected to embed the message.
Amirtharajan et al., (2013), proposed randomized LSB embedding based on some
routines, in which the method embeds data into the selected pixels based on the four
LSBs of the Key. If key K = 13[0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1] then embedding should be in the 1st,
3rd
and 4th
LSBs. If key K = 165 [1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1] then embedding should be done in
the pixels 1st and 3
rd LSBs. This sequence of embedding is repeated for a block of
eight pixels for complete embedding. But there exists problem with such approach in
that if the LSBs of the key value are all zeroes then no embedding can take place.
For all the methods discussed above embeds the secret data in all the three planes
(Red, Green and Blue) in random manner.
7.2 Proposed Data Hiding Technique
This chapter introduces an approach of least significant bit (LSB) based
steganography in digital images that can override some statistical and structural
measures of detection. In this method, there is a provision of increasing the robustness
by spreading message bits randomly. One of the main characteristics of this
steganographic technique is that the data are embedded only in the red plane of the
cover-image‟s pixel which is determined by a PRNG (Pseudo-Random Number
Generator) initiated by a stego-key. A key is used as seed for the pseudo-random
number generator which is needed in the embedding process (Venkatraman et al.,
2004). By using the key, the chance of getting attacked by the third party is reduced as
it spreads the secret data over the whole stego-image randomly. Such mechanism
preserves the visuality of the stego-image finely so that the manipulation is not
detectable by visual interpretation. In general the embedding process inserts a mark X
(secret message), in an object Y (cover-image). A key K, initiated by a random
number generator is used in the embedding process and the resulting marked object Y
is generated by mapping
X * Y * K = Y (7.2)
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
131
The pseudorandom number generator is used to choose the pixels randomly and
embed the message into the selected pixels that makes the message bits more difficult
to find and reduces the realization of patterns in the image (Luo et al., 2011;
Manchanda et al., 2007). If the message is much smaller than the capacity of the
image, a problem may occur whereby the information is packed into one part of the
image for example the top half. This is solved by using a PRNG which will spread the
message all over the image (Dedic et al., 2009). A pseudo random number generator
calculates and selects the order of pixels to be chosen for data embedding based on
the key. This randomization function is reversible function, i.e. the function generates
a random sequence of a bit stream input, but it can also regenerate the original
sequence when the randomized sequence is taken as input (Pujari and Mukhopadhyay,
2012). Thus, data is hidden into the LSB of the red plane of the randomly selected
pixel of the cover-image using the mechanism of PRNG which further enhances the
process of randomization.
7.2.1 Data embedding procedure
In the embedding process the pixels of the cover-image are selected randomly and
their red plane‟s LSB is replaced with the bits of the secret message. As image
comprises of pixel contribution from color components and changing the LSBs does
not affect the perception of the resulting image. For 24-bit bitmap image if a pixel‟s
red plane value is 10111011and changing the LSB with the secret bit, then at the
worst case the pixel value changes to 10111010, which does not affect the statistics of
the image. Changing the least bit in a byte of an image, either increment or decrement
value from the pixel it represents. So, the secret messages are stored into LSBs of red
plane of the cover-image‟s pixels.
In performing the hiding operation, the secret message is first converted into byte
format and stored in a byte array. It is then embedded into the LSB position of each
pixel‟s red plane. It uses the first pixel (at spot 0) to hide the length of message
(number of character). If the original pixel bits is considered as: (r7 r6 r5 r4 r3 r2 r1
r0, g7 g6 g5 g4 g3 g2 g1 g0, b7 b6 b5 b4 b3 b2 b1 b0) and a character of the secret
message has bits: (c7 c6 c5 c4 c3 c2 c1 c0). The character bit is embedded into the
LSB of red plane only while keeping LSBs of the green and blue plane remain
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
132
unaltered. So, after embedding the character bit the new pixel is formed as (r7 r6 r5 r4
r3 r2 r1 c0, g7 g6 g5 g4 g3 g2 g1 g0, b7 b6 b5 b4 b3 b2 b1 b0). In this way, the next
character bit is embedded into the LSB of the next randomly selected pixel‟s red plane
and the process continues until the entire message is embedded. Thus, it ensures that
the secret message is embedded into different LSBs of the selected pixel‟s red plane
only. So selected pixels used for embedding are scattered and thus increases the
security of message highly.
If a pixel (225,100,100) represented in binary form (11100001, 01100100, 01100100)
is a part of the cover-image into which message character “d” having binary value
1100100 (ASCII value 100) is embedded then placing the first bit of “d” in pixel‟s red
plane a new pixel is obtained as (224, 100,100) represented in binary (11100000,
01100100, 01100100). Here it is noticed that the pixel value of (225, 100,100) is
changed to (224,100,100). From experiments it is observed that such changes will not
have noticeable statistical and color difference in the image.
In this method the red plane is selected for data embedding. The blue and green planes
are left unmodified. So after performing the embedding operation the unmodified
green and blue planes are added to the modified red plane to form the final stego-
image.
7.2.2 Key based Random embedding
In the process of LSB embedding, pseudo random number generator (PRNG) is used
to select the hiding points in the red plane of the cover image pixel by using a random
interval method. One of the most basic primitive of pseudorandom number generator
is the random generator, also known as a keystream generator. Here a random
generator is used that randomly select pixel‟s positions to hide the bits of a secret
message into the LSB of the red plane within a cover image. When using an
algorithmic keystream generator is to have a seed as well as a key. The keystream in
order to appear “random” must have the property an opponent who gets their hands on
even a number of keystream bits should not be able to predict any more of them. A
pseudo-random sequence is generated from a pseudo-random number generator
(PRNG) initialized by a secret stego-key. The transmitting and receiving end share the
stego-key, the output of the key is a random sequence K1, K2,……….., Kn where n is
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
133
the length of message bits. Thus key is used not only as password but also as
sequence of pseudorandom permutations which locates the random pixel positions in
a cover-image. The pseudo-random sequence can be started at any position in the
sequence by initializing the generator with a seed. The seed defines the starting
position of the sequence and based on the seed the key produces a long random
sequence which is then used by the sender to generate the sequence of pixel indices yi
to get random location where,
y1 = K1
yi = yi-1 + Ki, i >2. (7.3)
The inputs to the embedding process are the bits of pixel indices Y and key K. Each
round has inputs Yi-1 and Ki used to locate the random position where the message bit
is to be embedded. These pixel indices are derived from the previous pixel indices, as
well as a subkey Ki, derived from the overall K. In general, the subkeys Ki are
different from K and from each other. The choosing of key is based Diffie-Hellman
key exchange algorithm which they used for encryption process that enables two users
to securely exchange a key and such algorithm depends for its effectiveness on the
difficulty of computing discrete logarithms (Stallings, 2006).
In the process of random pixel selection, two known numbers: a prime number „p‟
and an integer that is a primitive root of „p‟ are used. Firstly, in order to find a seed
for embedding a prime number „p‟ is searched that exceeds the key K. Then a
primitive root „a‟ of prime number is obtained that is a number whose powers
generate all the integers from 1 to p-1. That is, if „a‟ is a primitive root of the prime
number „p‟, then the numbers
a mod p, a2 mod p,..., a
p-1 mod p (7.4)
which are distinct and consist of the integers from 1 through p-1 in some permutation.
Each power of this primitive root to generate these integers is called the discrete
algorithm.
For any integer y and a primitive root „a‟ of prime number „p‟, a unique exponent i
can be found such that
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
134
y ≡ ai (mod p), where 0 ≤ i ≤ (p-1) (7.5)
where the exponent i is referred to as the discrete logarithm of b for the base a, mod p.
This primitive root a, is then used to generate a set of random and distinct
numbers, yi = ai mod p, where i is the bit index of the secret message. Message bit „i‟
is then embedded into the LSB of the pixel yi and the order in which the secret
message bits are embedded is determined pseudo randomly. In this way it is ensured
that the bits of the secret message are inserted into distinct LSBs. The message is
encoded at pseudo-randomly chosen red planes. Thus embedding only in a single
plane will make small changes in the cover-image and such change is not visible and
detectable by the attacker. It could also make it more difficult for an attacker to figure
out the meaning of randomly extracted bits, incase an attacker is looking for evidence
of embedded information. By using a random number generator initialized with a
stego-key and its output is combined with the input data (secret message) which are
then embedded to a cover image. The usage of a stego-key is important, because the
security of a protection system should not be based on the secrecy of the algorithm
itself but also on choice of a secret key. In the random insertion method the random
location of the pixels depends on a stego key, whose size k should be in the range n <
k < I, where n is the size of message and I is the size of cover image. The main
property of a pseudorandom function is one-wayness. For a known input K, the
random sequence K1, K2,……….., Kn can easily be computed but it is very difficult
to reverse the process if K is unknown. The security of the Diffie-Hellman key
exchange lies in the fact that, while it is relatively easy to calculate exponentials
modulo a prime, it is very difficult to calculate discrete logarithms and for large
primes, the latter task is considered infeasible (Stallings, 2006). The purpose of using
prime number is that they occur in random.
Embedding Algorithm
i. Read character from text file that is to be hidden and convert the ASCII value
of the character into equivalent binary value into an 8 bit integer array.
ii. Read the RGB color image into which the message is to be embedded and
extract the red plane of the host image.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
135
iii. Initialize the key which gives the random position of the pixel‟s red plane to
be processed for embedding. The key produces random sequence of pixel
positions.
iv. Check the value of LSB (0 or 1) present in each pixel‟s red plane.
v. Pick up the message bit. If the message bit is zero and pixel bit is one then
decrement the pixel value. Else increment the pixel value. If message bit =
pixel bit, do nothing.
vi. Repeat step (iv) to (v) for the remaining random sequences (pixel indices).
vii. Add the green and blue plane with the modified red plane
viii. Write the above pixel to Stego-image file.
7.2.3 Technique to Retrieve secret message
To extract the message from the stego-image, the same stego-key is supplied to the
extraction algorithm which is used during the embedding process. This produces the
same sequence of random permutation or keystream based on the key. Because the
key integrates the random interval of pixels using a pseudo random number generator
(PRNG) to allocate the position of the cover image to embed the secret data. Since the
secret message is embedded in the cover-image‟s red plane thus in decoding only the
pixel‟s red plane is extracted and the correct key can take out the exact random
locations of the secret bits and thereby finding the correct seed (or starting value of
embedding), the value which is used to initialize the PRNG. The seed to initiate the
pseudo-random numbers is shared between the sender and the receiver and without
the correct seed the correct sequence of pixels will not be extracted. As the seed k is
known, ki can be reconstructed and therefore the entire sequence of pixel indices yi.
Even when knowing the image steganography algorithm, the receiver will only able to
extract a random string of data without knowledge of the order of the embedded
information. In other words, in extracting the message, the correct seed can trace the
embedding path and thus recovering the embedded bits. Therefore, the stego-key is
shared by both the sender and receiver during the secret communication.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
136
Extraction Algorithm
i. Open the Stego image, read the RGB color of each pixel.
ii. Extract the pixels red plane of the stego-image.
iii. Initialize the key that gives the position of the message bits in the random
pixels red plane where the secret bits are embedded.
iv. For decoding, select the pixels using the same pseudo-random sequence. As
the key knows the seed k, ki can be reconstructed and therefore the entire
sequence of pixel indices yi.
v. Read the LSB of the red plane of each pixel and put it directly in an array.
vi. Repeat step (v) for the entire sequence of pixel indices.
vii. Then content of the array converts into decimal value which is actually ASCII
value of hidden character.
7.3 Performance evaluation and Discussion
In this section, issues relating to the experimental approach are considered which is
used in the study to measure the impact of random embedding on the main aspects of
steganography. To evaluate the performance of the proposed scheme, several images
are used. In the first stage of the experiments, the proposed steganography method is
used to embed secret data in order to get a stego image. The secret data are embedded
in the random location of the red plane‟s LSBs in the cover-image which is
determined by a PRNG initiated by a stego-key. The experiments have been simulated
using the MATLAB R2009b program on Windows 7 platform using various
performance parameters. Here also, the PSNR is applied as performance measurement
criteria classified under the difference image distortion metrics and the MSE shows
variation between the cover- image and resultant (stego) image.
In the first case a color image baboon of size 512x512 is used as cover shown in figure
7.3 to embed secret messages of 18 K.B and 32 K.B and by using stego-key of 5000 and
15000. The messages are embedded into the red plane of the cover-image and the resulted
stego-image is as shown in figure 7.4 (a)-(d) respectively.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
137
Figure 7.3: Cover-image
(a) Stego-image with key=5000 (b) Stego-image with key=15000
Figure 7.4 (a) and (b) Stego-images formed by embedding 18 K.B (kilobyte) of secret
message using two different keys
(c) Stego-image with key=5000 (d) Stego-image with key=15000
Figure 7.4 (c) and (d) Stego-images formed by embedding 32 K.B (kilobyte) of secret
message using two different keys
From normal eyes perception, the result of the stego-images looks identical to the
cover-image as there appears no noticeable difference between them and the
complexity of the image is not disturbed as shown in figure 7.3 and 7.4 (a), (b), (c)
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
138
and (d). This is because there are little changes of the pixel values and thus no
significant difference. Thus, in order to evaluate the efficiency of the proposed
steganography method, three dependent variables are considered: the steganographic
capacity, the quality of stego images (in PSNR and MSE) and the computational time.
These variables are the most commonly used aspects of image steganographic
systems. The computational time has been considered to investigate the impact of
embedding data using the pseudo random number generator for selecting the pixel and
embedding data on the processing time and has been measured for embedding and
extraction process. The results of the embedding process are listed in table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Results of embedding 18 K.B and 32 K.B of secret message into cover-
image baboon using two different stego-key
From table 7.1, it is observed that for all cases, PSNR is greater than 56 where the
message capacity ranges from 18 KB and 32 KB. On the other hand, the time
increases with the gradual increase in capacity. In addition, different key supplied also
generates different set of random numbers and thereby selecting different random
positions. If a bigger key size is chosen, the bigger the range of random numbers will
be generated, therefore the message bits will be scattered in a larger area. From table
7.1 it is seen that in embedding 18 Kb of secret data using key value 5000 the time to
embed and extract are 100.881718 and 96.411367 respectively whereas using key
value 15000 the time to embed and extract are 78.851781 and 75.386250 respectively,
thus the time computation decreases with increase in stego-key and same is the case
Cover-
Image
Message
Size
(in K.B)
key M.S.E P.S.N.R Time to
embed
(in seconds)
Time to
Extract
(in seconds)
baboon
18 kb
5000 0.0756 59.3438 100.881718 96.411367
15000 0.0755 59.3531 78.851781 75.386250
32kb
5000 0.1337 56.8699 543.146239 522.198800
15000 0.1339 56.8638 498.237917 479.118670
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
139
for embedding 32 KB of secret data. Thus it can be stated that for larger key value the
time computation decreases.
As in the process of LSB embedding, a pseudo random number generator (PRNG)
which is seeded with a stego-key is used to select the random positions in the red
plane of the cover image by using a random interval method. The key produces a long
random sequence which is then used by the sender to generate the sequence of pixel
indices to get random location to embed the secret bits. Thus a wrong key will not
able to extract the random locations and thereby the original secret message cannot be
retrieved as shown in figure in figure 7.5.
Figure 7.5: Extracted Message with wrong key
This system has been developed to overcome a sequence-mapping problem when
using LSB which can be detected. However by using discrete logarithm calculation,
the problem of sequence-mapping can be solved. The work not only aims to preserve
the visual integrity of the image used for embedding but also the method should be
free from statistical attacks. So, distortion analysis of stego images is carried out by
analyzing statistical properties of the stego-images in comparison with the cover-
image. In the proposed method embedding of secret data is performed in the LSBs of
the cover-image. So, the method is also analyzed using statistical property by
visualizing the LSB bit-planes of cover-image and stego-images.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
140
Figure 7.6 Basic least significant bit of the cover image baboon (8-th bit)
(a) LSB of Stego-image with key=5000 (b) LSB of Stego-image with key=15000
Figure 7.7: (a) and (b) Basic least significant bit of the stego-images (8-th bit) of
baboon where the secret message of size 18 KB is embedded using two different keys
(c) LSB of Stego-image with key=5000 (d) LSB of Stego-image with key=15000
Figure 7.7: (c) and (d) Basic least significant bit of the stego-images (8-th bit) of
baboon where the secret message of size 32KB is embedded using two different keys
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
141
The bit-plane of an image is a set of bits corresponding to a given bit position in each
of the binary numbers representing the image where the first bit plane contains the set
of the most significant bit, and the last part contains the least significant bit. In order
to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method the least bit-plane of the
cover-image and the stego-images of baboon is presented in figure 7.6 and figure 7.7
(a)-(d) respectively. These are the bit-planes of the cover-image and stego-images of
figure 7.3 and figure 7.4 respectively. As the secret data is embedded into the LSB of
the red plane and thus present the overall LSB of the 8-th bit of figure 7.3 and figure
7.4 is presented where the data is embedded. Thus it can be seen that the difference in
the LSB bit-plane (8-th bit) where the secret bits are embedded cannot be traced as
there appears no major difference between the bit-plane of the cover-image and the
stego-images as seen in figure 7.6 and figure 7.7 (a)-(d). So, there appears no visible
difference between the bit-planes. This is because changing LSB either adds or
subtract 0 or 1. Also when the bit and the secret message and the LSB are same, then
no alternation of the pixels value takes place. Thus the proposed method preserves the
visual integrity of the image used for embedding but also the method is also free from
statistical and structural attacks.
In the second experiment, a comparative analysis of the proposed method with
Amirtharajan et al., (2013) scheme is conducted. Two well-known images Lena and
Rose each with size 250 × 250 are used as cover-images. The experiment is presented
to compare the impact of embedding 1.09 KB of secret message with different stego-
key values ranging from 2 to 205 on both the methods. The cover-image and the
resulting stego-images are presented in figure 7.8 and 7.9. For this case, the dependent
variables MSE and PSNR of red, green and blue plane are used for comparing.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
142
(a) cover-image (b) stego-image (c) stego-image
(d) stego-image (e) stego-image (f) stego-image
(g) stego-image (h) stego-image (i) stego-image
(j) stego-image (k) stego-image (l) stego-image
Figure 7.8: (a) Cover-image: Lena and (b)-(l) its resulting stego-images
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
143
(a) cover-image (b) stego-image (c) stego-image
(d) stego-image (e) stego-image (f) stego-image
(g) stego-image (h) stego-image (i) stego-image
(j) stego-image (k) stego-image (l) stego-image
Figure 7.9: (a) Cover-image Rose and (b)-(l) its resulting stego-images
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
144
Table 7.2: Results of comparison of the proposed method with Amirtharajan et al., (2013) method using Lena as cover-image and
message size of 1.09 K.B
Sample Key
values
Amirtharajan et al. (2013) Proposed Method
MSE PSNR MSE PSNR
Red Green Blue Red Green Blue Red Green Blue Red Green Blue
Key value=2 0.05152 0.4953 0.05004 61.01 61.18 61.14 0.0369 - - 62.46 - -
Key value=4 0.19328 0.194304 0.19712 55.27 55.25 55.18 0.0371 - - 62.44 - -
Key value=5 0.11340 0.115856 0.10875 57.58 57.49 57.77 0.0370 - - 62.44 - -
Key value=6 0.14828 0.140992 0.13337 56.42 56.64 56.88 0.0371 - - 62.44 - -
Key value=8 0.78848 0.8448 0.77721 49.16 48.86 49.22 0.0372 - - 62.43 - -
Key value=9 0.40867 0.390608 0.41651 52.02 52.21 51.93 0.0370 - - 62.45 - -
Key value=10 0.45043 0.4208 0.45363 51.59 51.89 51.56 0.0370 - - 62.45 - -
Key value=11 0.32524 0.295984 0.33129 53.01 53.41 52.93 0.0369 - - 62.46 - -
Key value=12 0.60876 0.516096 0.54758 50.28 51.00 50.75 0.0373 - - 62.41 - -
Key value=13 0.39052 0.374032 0.38801 52.21 52.40 52.24 0.0376 - - 62.37 - -
Key value=14 0.42124 0.411584 0.42278 51.88 51.99 51.87 0.0372 - - 62.43 - -
Key value=165 0.12148 0.108288 0.12128 57.28 57.78 57.29 0.0375 - - 62.38 - -
Key value=173 0.43398 0.370256 0.39676 51.75 52.44 52.14 0.0373 - - 62.41 - -
Key value=205 0.43862 0.369184 0.39641 51.71 52.46 52.15 0.0369 - - 62.45 - -
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
145
Table 7.3: Results of comparison of the proposed method with Amirtharajan et al., (2013) method using Rose as cover-image
and message size of 1.09 K.B
Sample Key
values
Amirtharajan et al. (2013) Proposed Method
MSE PSNR MSE PSNR
Red Green Blue Red Green Blue Red Green Blue Red Green Blue
Key value=2 0.05050 0.05260 0.0498 61.09 60.92 61.15 0.0379 - - 62.35 - -
Key value=4 0.20120 0.20600 0.21555 55.09 54.99 54.79 0.0375 - - 62.39 - -
Key value=5 0.11620 0.11130 0.1131 57.48 57.66 57.59 0.0374 - - 62.40 - -
Key value=6 0.14140 0.12580 0.1424 56.62 57.13 56.59 0.0380 - - 62.33 - -
Key value=8 0.77920 0.85700 0.8386 49.21 48.30 48.89 0.0377 - - 62.37 - -
Key value=9 0.42408 0.42752 0.43091 51.86 51.82 51.78 0.0375 - - 62.39 - -
Key value=10 0.46750 0.46080 0.46144 51.43 51.49 51.49 0.0376 - - 62.38 - -
Key value=11 0.30530 0.30520 0.3025 53.28 53.28 53.32 0.0376 - - 62.38 - -
Key value=12 0.60210 0.58850 0.6097 50.33 50.43 50.28 0.0377 - - 62.36 - -
Key value=13 0.40430 0.37200 0.39712 52.06 52.42 52.14 0.0374 - - 62.40 - -
Key value=14 0.43100 0.39920 0.4055 51.78 52.12 52.05 0.0376 - - 62.38 - -
Key value=165 0.11228 0.11094 0.11161 57.63 57.68 57.65 0.0378 - - 62.36 - -
Key value=173 0.43810 0.39480 0.41724 51.71 52.17 51.93 0.0374 - - 62.39 - -
Key value=205 0.43448 0.39251 0.41582 51.75 52.19 51.94 0.0376 - - 62.38 - -
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
146
The results in parts figure 7.8 (b) - (l) and 7.9 (b) - (l) are the stego-images of Lena and
Rose respectively which are produced by the proposed method. It can be seen that the
difference between the cover-image and stego-images cannot be perceived.
Figure 7.10: Comparison of PSNR values of the proposed method with Amirtharajan et
al., (2013) method with different key values for cover-image Lena
Figure 7.11: Comparison of PSNR values of the proposed method with Amirtharajan et
al., (2013) method with different key values for cover-image Rose
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
147
In the second experiment, the effect of increasing the value of keys on the proposed
method and the Amirtharajan et al., (2013) method is evaluated. The results of this
experiment are shown in Table 7.2 and 7.3. In the proposed method as the embedding
takes place only in the red plane, so after performing the embedding operation green and
blue color planes are recombined into an RGB image to form the final stego-image. Thus
the MSE and PSNR values of the green and blue plane of the stego-images with respect
to cover-image does not change, as the pixel values of these planes remained the same
and no change occurrs in these planes. Thus in comparing the proposed method the
PSNR and MSE of the red plane shows variations. In the proposed method the PSNR
value of the red plane equals to the PSNR value of the cover-image. From the table 7.2
and 7.3 it is seen that the proposed method shows better PSNR value than the
Amirtharajan et al., (2013) in comparing the values of the red plane. It is also seen that
the PSNR value dynamically changes with the change in key value in Amirtharajan et al.,
(2013) scheme as the value of PSNR ranges from 50 dB to 61 dB whereas in the
proposed method the PSNR value are mostly static as the PSNR value are 62 dB for all
key values as shown in figure 7.10 and 7.11. The results show the difference between the
two methods, indicates that the quality and security of the stego-image is improved when
such randomization approach is utilized. A larger PSNR value indicates the fact that the
discrepancy between the cover image and the stego-image is more invisible to the human
eye. The results of the comparative evaluation are tabulated in table 7.2 and table 7.3 that
shows the PSNR values obtained demonstrate that the proposed scheme is superior to
Amirtharajan et al. (2013).
To evaluate further, two cover-images namely Desert and Tulips are used to embed secret
data for forming stego images. The secret messages used are of variable sizes ranging
from 4.81 K.B to 95.2 K.B that are embedded into desert and tulips. The resulting stego-
images of desert are plotted in figure 7.12 (b)-(f). For evaluation of the steganographic
technique several dependent variables are considered: the steganographic capacity, the
quality of stego images (PSNR and MSE), the size of stego images and secret messages,
the computational time etc. Therefore, all these variables are measured for the two test
images. The computational time has been considered to investigate the impact of random
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
148
base embedding on the processing time and has been measured for both embedding and
extraction process. The results of embedding the secret messages into the cover images
are listed in Table 7.4.
(a)Cover-image (b) Stego-image
(c) Stego-image (d) Stego-image
(e) Stego-image (f) Stego-image
Figure 7.12: (a) Cover-image Desert and (b)-(f) the stego-images
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
149
Statistical undetectability is one of the characters of a steganographic algorithm. The
statistical analysis compares the original image with the stego image based on histogram
(first order statistics) of images.
(a) Histogram of Cover-image (b) Histogram of Stego-image
(c) Histogram of Stego-image (d) Histogram of Stego-image
(e) Histogram of Stego-image (f) Histogram of Stego-image
Figure 7.13: (a) Histogram of cover-image Desert and (b)-(f) Histograms of the
corresponding stego-images
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
150
Using histogram of cover image and stego-image the statistical property of the proposed
scheme is evaluated as shown in figure 7.13 (a) and figure (b)-(f) respectively. If the
distortion occurs then it can be suspected that the images may contain hidden data.
Comparing the histogram of the original channels, before and after modifying channels
can give a clear idea of the security; i.e. if change is minimal then the stego system is
considered secure. There seems no difference in the value of the pixel intensity in the
range 0 to 255 for the cover image and its stego image. The statistical change between the
original image and stego-image cannot be predicted as in figure 7.13 (a) and 7.13 (b) - (f)
respectively. The differences between the images before and after hiding the data cannot
be sensed through histograms of the RGB channels. It is seen, from different test runs at
different distributions between the three channels it is seen that they have particular
patterns in common.
Table 7.4: Shows the results of the proposed method using two cover-images Desert and
Tulips and secret message of variable sizes
Cover-
Image
Message
Size
(in K.B)
Stego-
image
Red
Plane
MSE
Red
Plane
PSNR
Overall
M.S.E
Overall
P.S.N.R
Time to
embed
(in
seconds)
Time to
Extract
(in
seconds)
Desert
4.81 stegdesert1 0.0074 69.44 0.0074 69.44 7.6925 1.20
15.5 stegdesert2 0.0237 64.38 0.0237 64.38 17.75 13.37
29.1 stegdesert3 0.0446 61.64 0.0446 61.64 58.40 66.86
64 stegdesert4 0.0942 58.39 0.0942 58.39 246.31 381.11
95.2 stegdesert5 0.1399 56.67 0.1399 56.67 711.50 940.28
Tulips
4.81 stegtulips1 0.0074 69.46 0.0074 69.46 8.17 1.08
15.5 stegtulips2 0.0236 64.40 0.0236 64.40 16.06 13.47
29.1 stegtulips3 0.0444 61.66 0.0444 61.66 58.70 65.62
64 stegtulips4 0.1019 58.05 0.1019 58.05 234.67 359.35
95.2 stegtulips5 0.1513 56.33 0.1513 56.33 693.32 911.18
In this evaluation process five sets of message ranging from 4.81 to 95.2 K.B in size are
embedded into cover-images Desert and Tulips as shown in table 7.4. The objective of
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
151
this experiment is to show the effect of increasing the number of message size of the
proposed method on the PSNR and the computation time. It can seen that PSNR values
decreases gradually with the increase in message capacity and also the time computation
(embed and extract time) increases with increase in message. Thus it can be stated that
PSNR and computation time directly relates to the steganographic method. In this
evaluation the PSNR and the MSE value of the green and blue plane remains the same for
both cover-image and stego-image as the embedding takes place only in the red plane. So
in the table 7.4, the PSNR and MSE of red plane are plotted. The PSNR value of red
plane is same as the PSNR value of the overall image and so is uniformly distributed
among all the three channels as it uses all the planes. This improves the imperceptibility
and enhances the embedding capacity.
Figure 7.14: Shows the PSNR values when secret message of different sizes are
embedded into the cover-images desert and tulips
For both the cover-image, it is seen that the PSNR value gradually decrease from 69dB to
55 dB with the increase in message size from 4.81 K.B to 95.2 K.B as seen in figure 7.14.
So, increase in the amount of embedded data lowers PSNR value but still the PSNR
values are perfect and acceptable as embedding 95.2 K.B of secret data the PSNR values
for both the cover-image desert and tulips is 55 dB. The lower PSNR values owing to
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
152
modifying more cover image pixels i.e. when more data are embedded. In other words,
the PSNR value of the cover images may be different due to the various sizes of secret
data. Certainly, it has higher PSNR values with lower modified rates.
Thus, to demonstrate the overall accomplished performance of the proposed approach in
evaluation process for hiding secret data in the cover-image, some experiments are
conducted using different cover-images of different resolutions to compare the proposed
approach with fixed and variable message size. Steganography message can be embedded
into digital images in ways that are imperceptible to the human eye. In other words, a
stego-image that is generated by the proposed algorithm is normal for human vision and
cannot be detected. The histogram behaviors of the images determine how large amount
of secret data can be embedded and still maintaining the statistical properties of the
resulting stego-images as seen in figure 7.13. By comparing tables 7.1 and 7.4, it is seen
that the actual PSNRs obtained are above the lower bounds. This serves as a good
predictor when any one image is to serve as a host for data embedding. PSNR values
falling below 30 dB indicate a low quality and a high quality stego-image should strive
for 40 dB and above (Cheddad et al. 2010). From various other reviews it is also found
that a color image should offer PSNR above 40 dB. From various experimental
evaluations it is found that the proposed method retrieves PSNR value above 56 dB
which means no significant degradation occurs.
Therefore, it is clearly seen from the experimental results that the performance of
proposed method is better. In addition to that, the advantage of proposed method is that
employment of stego key in embedding process provides better security. Results are
considered for color image of various dimensions using different stego-keys. It is also
seen in table 7.1 and table 7.4 that the computation time decreases by the number of key
increase which means that by increasing the number of key permutation, the Computation
time decreases and the System security increases. On the average case, the proposed
method embeds one bit in each pixel of red plane of a color image. The embedding
capacity can easily be enhanced by using two or three LSBs. In such case there will be a
decrease in PSNR value.
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
153
In discussing the performance of the proposed method in terms of the stego-image quality
and the robustness against the detection attack. The proposed method does not select the
pixels LSBs of sequentially, instead it selects randomly based on key. By examining the
stego-images quality where the minimum and the maximum pixel-value alteration
happen, it is observed that the pixel alternation that takes place is negligible as seen in the
evaluation process. There appear no obvious suspicious artifacts on the resulting images
or bit-planes by statistical inspection as seen in figure 7.6 and 7.7.
In addition, the proposed scheme is secure against the well-known steganalysis like RS
detection attack or histogram analysis. The RS detection method proposed by Fridrich et
al. (2001) that targets LSB steganography. According to Fridrich et al. (2001), if more
and more LSBs are replaced with secret data, then the percentages regular and singular
values of two groups of pixels becomes more and more unequal. But from the overall
evaluation metrics the results of the method as shown indicate that the stego-images are
not suspicious, because the expected value of regular group of the cover-images to that of
the stego-images is close and so are the case singular groups as seen by verifying the bit-
planes (as in figure 7.6 and figure 7.7) and also the histogram (as in figure 7.13). This is
because the secret data are embedded only in the red plane whereas the green and blue
planes remain the same and thereby not altering much the pixel selected for data hiding.
This proves that the steganographic method is secure from the viewpoint of various
attacks. If the histogram does not display a smooth curve, the image is judged as a
suspicious image. In Figure 7.13, the histogram results of original image and stego-image
are plotted which displays a smooth curve. According to the overall analysis, it is
concluded that the proposed scheme is secure against the statistical and structural attacks.
7.4 Chapter Summary
In this chapter an approach of secure least significant bit (LSB) based steganography in
digital images that can override some statistical and structural measures of detecting
steganography. In this method, there is a provision of increasing the robustness by
spreading message bits randomly. Such approach is to overcome from the sequential
Steganography based on Random pixel
selection
154
LSB embedding where the message is encoded in the image file sequentially which
makes the detection easier. The primary characteristic of this steganographic technique is
that the data are embedded only in the red plane of the cover-image‟s pixel which is
determined by a PRNG initiated by a stego-key. By doing this, the method spreads the
secret data over the whole stego image randomly and the chance of getting the secret
message by the unintended receiver is reduced. Moreover the by selecting only the red
plane for embedding further enhances the security. The random number generator locates
the hiding positions in the red plane of the cover image by using a random interval
method. Here the key is used not only as password but also as a random position locater
in the cover-image and which becomes significantly difficult for the attacker to figure out
the target pixels. Since embedding operated only in red plane thus in decoding only the
pixel‟s red plane is selected and the same stego-key is used. In examining the proposed
technique, it is seen from the overall evaluation metrics the performance of the proposed
method indicate good results and is found to be robust against many attacks. The method
proposed has been empirically validated as to indicate its utility and value.