Advertisement

Tampering detection using hybrid local and global features in wavelet-transformed space with digital images

  • J. Nirmal JothiEmail author
  • S. Letitia
Methodologies and Application

Abstract

The widespread availability of advanced digital image technology and powerful image editing tools has made it extremely easy to manipulate image content. One popular technique that is challenging for tampering detection methods is the copy–move forgery. Here, one part of the image is copied and is pasted into another part of the same image. Image tampering is very difficult to detect with the naked eye. The authenticity of digital images is critical when they are used as evidence in court, for news reports or insurance claims, as they have the power to influence decisions and outcomes. Hence, this paper presents an efficient method for copy–move forgery detection by means of a HOG descriptor and local binary pattern variance algorithms. The copy–move forgery detection (CMFD) approach is introduced and is applied to the forged region by determining suitable post-processing techniques. The proposed technique is evaluated using MICC-F220, MICC-F2000, UCID, CoMoFoD and CASIA TIDE data sets in which translation, flipping, rotation, scaling, color reduction, brightness change and JPEG compression are applied to an image. The experimental performance of the proposed technique is assessed in terms of the true- and false-detection rates. Ultimately, our proposed method is highly suitable for detecting the altered region, and accurate CMFD results are obtained in forensic image applications.

Keywords

Altered image Forensics Square block Circular block Passive method 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with animal/human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. AI-Qershi OM, Khoo BE (2013) Passive detection of copy–move forgery in digital images: state-of-the-art. Forensic Sci Int 231(1):284–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkawaz M, Sulong G, Saba T, Rehman A (2018) Detection of copy–move image forgery based on discrete cosine transform. Neural Comput Appl 30(1):183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Qershi OM, Khoo BE (2018) Evaluation of copy–move forgery detection: datasets and evaluation metrics. Multimed Tools Appl 77:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amerini I, Lamberto R, Alberto GS (2011) A SIFT-based forensic method for copy–move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 6(3):1099–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ardizzone E, Bruno A, Mazzola G (2015) Copy–move forgery detection by matching triangles of keypoint. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 10(10):2084–2094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayram S, Sencar HT, Memom N (2009) An efficient and robust method for detecting copy–move forgery. In: Acoustics, speech and signal processing, pp 1053–1056Google Scholar
  7. Bravo-Solorio S, Nandi AK (2011) Automated detection and localisation of duplicated regions affected by reflection, rotation and scaling in image forensics. Sig Process 91(8):1759–1770CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen L, Lu W, Ni J, Sun W, Huang J (2013) Region duplication detection based on Harris corner points and step sector statistics. J Vis Commun Image Represent 24(3):244–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cozzolino D, Poggi G, Verdoliva L (2015) Efficient dense-field copy–move forgery detection. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 10(11):2284–2297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixit R, Naskar R, Mishra S (2017) Blur invariant copy–move forgery detection technique with improved detection accuracy utilizing SWT-SVD. IET Image Proc 11(5):301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fridrich AJ, Soukal BD, Rehman A (2003) Detection of copy–move forgery in digital images. In: Proceedings of digital forensic workshopGoogle Scholar
  12. Guo Z, Zhang L, Zhang D (2010) Rotation invariant texture classification using LBP variance with global matching. Pattern Recogn 43(3):706–719CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Hossain S, Muhammad G, Qurishi MA (2018) Verifying the image authenticity in cognitive internet of things (CIoT)-oriented cyber physical system. Mobile Netw Appl 23:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu R, Collomosse J (2013) A performance evaluation of gradient field hog descriptor for sketch based image retrieval. Comput Vis Image Underst 117(7):790–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Imamoglu MB, Ulutas G, Ulutas M (2013) Detection of copy–move forgery using Krawtchouk moment in electrical engineering. In: International conference on IEEE, pp 311–314Google Scholar
  16. Jaberi M, Bebis G, Hussain M, Muhammad G (2014) Accurate and robust localization of duplicated region in copy–move image forgery. Mach Vis Appl 25:451–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kakar P, Sudha N (2012) Exposing post processed copy–paste forgeries through transform invariant features. Inf Forensics Secur IEEE Trans 7:1018–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kang X, Wei S (2009) Identifying tampered regions using singular value decomposition in digital image forensics. In: International conference on computer science and software engineering, vol 3, pp 926–930Google Scholar
  19. Khizear H, Qazi T (2017) Forgery detection in digital images via discrete wavelet and discrete cosine transforms. Comput Electr Eng 62:448–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li Y (2013) Image copy–move forgery detection based on polar cosine transform and approximate nearest neighbour searching. Forensic Sci Int 224:59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li L, Li S, Wang J (2012) Copy–move forgery detection based on PHT. In: Information and communication technologies (WICT), pp 1061–1065Google Scholar
  22. Li L, Li S, Zhu H, Chu C, Roddick F, Pan JS (2013) An efficient scheme for detecting copy–move forged images by local binary patterns. J Inf Hiding Multimed Signal Process 4:46–56Google Scholar
  23. Li L, Li S, Zhu H, Wu X (2014) Detecting copy–move forgery under affine transforms for image forensics. Comput Electr Eng 40(6):1951–1962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li J, Li X, Yang B, Sun X (2015) Segmentation-based image copy–move forgery detection scheme. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 10(3):507–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lowe DG (2004) Distinctive image features from scale invariant keypoint. Int J Comput Vision 60(2):91–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mahadian B, Sai S (2009) Using noise inconsistencies for blind image forensics. Image Vis Comput 27:1497–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mahmood T, Nawaz T, Ashraf R, Shah M, Khan Z, Irtaza A, Mehmood Z (2015) A survey on block based copy move image forgery detection techniques. In: Emerging technologies (ICET), pp 1–6Google Scholar
  28. Mahmood T, Nawaz T, Irtaza A, Ashraf R, Shah M, Mahmood MT (2016) Copy–move forgery detection technique for forensic analysis in digital images. Math Probl Eng 2016:13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mahmood T, Mehmood Z, Shah S (2018) A robust technique for copy–move forgery detection and localization in digital images via stationary wavelet and discrete cosine transform. J Vis Commun Image Represent 53:202–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Popescu AC, Farid H (2005) Exposing digital forgeries by detecting traces of resampling. IEEE Trans Sig Process 53(2):758–767MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Pun C-M, Xiao-Chen Y, Bi X-L (2015) Image forgery detection using adaptive over segmentation and feature point matching. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 10(8):1705–1716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Quershi MA, Deriche M (2015) A bibliography of pixel-based blind image forgery detection techniques. Sig Process Image Commun 39:46–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ryu SJ, Kirchner M, Lee MJ, Lee HK (2013) Rotation invariant localization of duplicated image regions based on zernike moments. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 8(8):1355–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sadeghi S, Jalab HA, Wong KS, Uliyan D, Dadkhah S (2017) Keypoint based authentication and localization of copy–move forgery in digital image. Malays J Comput Sci 30(2):117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schaefer G, Stich M (2004) UCID: an uncompressed color image database. Storage Retr Methods Appl Multimed 5307:472–481Google Scholar
  36. Sujatha K, Punithavathani DS (2018) Optimized ensemble decision-based multi-focus image fusion using binary genetic Grey-Wolf optimizer in camera sensor networks. Multimedia Tools Appl 77(2):1735–1759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sundararaj V (2016) An efficient threshold prediction scheme for wavelet based ECG signal noise reduction using variable step size firefly algorithm. Int J Intell Eng Syst 9(3):117–126Google Scholar
  38. Sundararaj V (2019) Optimal task assignment in mobile cloud computing by queue based ant-bee algorithm. Wireless Pers Commun 104(1):173–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sundararaj V, Muthukumar S, Kumar RS (2018) An optimal cluster formation based energy efficient dynamic scheduling hybrid MAC protocol for heavy traffic load in wireless sensor networks. Comput Secur 77:277–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thirunavukkaras V, Kumar J, Chae G, Kishorkumar J (2018) Non-intrusive forensic detection method using DSWT with reduced feature set for copy–move image tampering. Wireless Pers Commun 98(4):3039–3057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tralic D, Zupancic I, Sona, Mislay (2013) CoMoFoD—new database for copy–move forgery detection. In: ELMAR, pp 49–54Google Scholar
  42. Uliyan DM, Jalab HA, Wahab AWA, Sadeghi S (2016) Image region duplication forgery detection based on angular radial partitioning and Harris key-points. Symmetry (Basel) 8(7):62MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang X-Y, Liu Y-N, Huan X, Wang P, Yang H-Y (2018) Robust copy–move forgery detection using quaternion exponent moments. Pattern Anal Appl 21(2):451–467MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xiuli C-MP, Yuan X-C (2016) Multilevel dense descriptor and hierarchical feature matching for copy–move forgery detection. Inf Sci 345:226–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yang ZC, Li Z-H (2012) An anti-JPEG compression digital watermarking technology with an ability in detecting forgery region for color images. In: International conference on computer distributed control and intelligent environmental monitoring, pp 93–97Google Scholar
  46. Zhang J, Feng Z, Su Y (2017) A new approach for detecting copy–move forgery in digital images. In: Communication systems, pp 362–366Google Scholar
  47. Zhangi Z, Ren Y, Ping X-J, He Z-Y, Zhang S-Z (2008) A survey on passive-blind image forgery by doctor method detection. Int Conf Mach Learn Cybern Kunming 6:3463–3467Google Scholar
  48. Zhao J, Guo J (2013) Passive forensics for copy–move forgery using a method based on DCT and SVD. Forensic Sci Int 233(1–3):158–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringSCAD College of Engineering and TechnologyTirunelveliIndia
  2. 2.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringThanthai Periyar Government Institute of TechnologyVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations