# A Robust and High Capacity Data Hiding Method for H.265/HEVC Compressed Videos with Block Roughness Measure and Error Correcting Techniques

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Related Works and Motivation

## 3. Overview of H.265/HEVC Video Coding Standard

#### 3.1. Improvements in H.265/HEVC over H.264/AVC

#### 3.1.1. Coding Unit

#### 3.1.2. Motion Estimation

#### 3.1.3. Transform Coding and Quantisation

#### 3.1.4. Entropy Coding

## 4. Overview of Error Correcting Techniques

#### 4.1. BCH Syndrome Error Correcting Codes

#### 4.2. Turbo Codes

## 5. Proposed Method of Data Hiding

#### 5.1. Block Selection Using JSD-SM Coarseness Measure

Algorithm 1: JSD-SM block coarseness algorithm |

#### 5.2. Data Embedding and Extraction

- Let a 3-bit message block be $M=\left({m}_{1}{m}_{2}{m}_{3}\right)$ and the destination block of seven QTCs is $QB=({Q}_{1},{Q}_{2},{Q}_{3},{Q}_{3},{Q}_{4},{Q}_{5},{Q}_{6},{Q}_{7})$. Only one of the ${Q}_{i}$s is modified to encode the message block in QTC block.
- Define three parity values ${P}_{1},{P}_{2}$ and ${P}_{3}$ as follows.$${P}_{1}=({Q}_{1}+{Q}_{3}+{Q}_{5}+{Q}_{7})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$$${P}_{2}=({Q}_{2}+{Q}_{3}+{Q}_{6}+{Q}_{7})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$$${P}_{3}=({Q}_{4}+{Q}_{5}+{Q}_{6}+{Q}_{7})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$
- To encode binary message bits $\left({m}_{1}{m}_{2}{m}_{3}\right)$, modify the QTC values according to the following rules:
**Case 1.**If $({m}_{1}={P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}={P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}={P}_{3})$, modify no QTC**Case 2.**If $({m}_{1}\ne {P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}={P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}={P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{1}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{1}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{1}|=|{Q}_{1}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{1}={Q}_{1}+1$**Case 3.**If $({m}_{1}={P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}\ne {P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}={P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{2}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{2}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{2}|=|{Q}_{2}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{2}={Q}_{2}+1$**Case 4.**If $({m}_{1}\ne {P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}\ne {P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}={P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{3}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{3}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{3}|=|{Q}_{3}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{3}={Q}_{3}+1$**Case 5.**If $({m}_{1}={P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}={P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}\ne {P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{4}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{4}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{4}|=|{Q}_{4}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{4}={Q}_{4}+1$**Case 6.**If $({m}_{1}\ne {P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}={P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}\ne {P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{5}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{5}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{5}|=|{Q}_{5}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{5}={Q}_{5}+1$**Case 7.**If $({m}_{1}={P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}\ne {P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}\ne {P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{6}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{6}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{6}|=|{Q}_{6}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{6}={Q}_{6}+1$**Case 8.**If $({m}_{1}\ne {P}_{1})\wedge ({m}_{2}\ne {P}_{2})\wedge ({m}_{3}\ne {P}_{3})$, modify ${Q}_{7}$ as follows. If $|{Q}_{7}|={Q}_{max}$, $|{Q}_{7}|=|{Q}_{7}-1|$. Else, ${Q}_{7}={Q}_{7}+1$

- Let a modified block of QTCs be $Q{B}^{\prime}=({Q}_{1}^{\prime},{Q}_{2}^{\prime},{Q}_{3}^{\prime},{Q}_{3}^{\prime},{Q}_{4}^{\prime},{Q}_{5}^{\prime},{Q}_{6}^{\prime},{Q}_{7}^{\prime})$.
- The parity conditions of the modified QTCs of the received cover medium are calculated with Equations (16)–(18) as follows:$${P}_{1}^{\prime}=({Q}_{1}^{\prime}+{Q}_{3}^{\prime}+{Q}_{5}^{\prime}+{Q}_{7}^{\prime})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$$${P}_{2}^{\prime}=({Q}_{2}^{\prime}+{Q}_{3}^{\prime}+{Q}_{6}^{\prime}+{Q}_{7}^{\prime})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$$${P}_{3}^{\prime}=({Q}_{4}^{\prime}+{Q}_{5}^{\prime}+{Q}_{6}^{\prime}+{Q}_{7}^{\prime})\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}mod\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}2$$
- Three message bits $({m}_{1}^{\prime},{m}_{2}^{\prime},{m}_{3}^{\prime})$ are extracted from $Q{B}^{\prime}$ as follows.$${m}_{1}^{\prime}={P}_{1}^{\prime},\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}{m}_{2}^{\prime}={P}_{2}^{\prime},\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}{m}_{3}^{\prime}={P}_{3}^{\prime}$$

#### Illustration

#### 5.3. Design of the BCH and Turbo Error Correcting Codes

#### 5.4. Overall Architecture of the Proposed Method

Algorithm 2: Embedding | |

Data: Video sequence, input message, parameter $\kappa $ | |

Result: HEVC/H.265 compressed video with embedded message | |

_{1} | Convert input message to binary data matrix D (e.g., using ASCII values if it is text); |

_{2} | Encode data matrix D with either BCH (Table 1) or Turbo coding scheme (Table 2). Let encoded data be ${D}_{e}$; |

_{3} | Start encoding YUV video to H.265/HEVC; |

_{4} | For each I-frame select the $4\times 4$, $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ TU blocks; |

_{5} | Evaluate coarseness ${C}_{JSD-SM}$ of each $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ blocks using Algorithm 1; |

_{6} | Sort two groups of $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ blocks based on their ${C}_{JSD-SM}$ values; |

_{7} | Select top $\kappa $ % most coarse blocks in each group of $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ TUs; |

_{8} | Embed encoded data ${D}_{e}$ sequentially in quantised DST coefficients of all $4\times 4$ TUs using $SME(1,3,7)$ embedding technique as described in Section 5.2; |

_{9} | Embed rest of the data in quantised DCT coefficients of selected $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ blocks using $SME(1,3,7)$ embedding technique as described in Section 5.2; |

_{10} | Continue HEVC compression process and the modified TU blocks are entropy coded (CABAC); |

_{11} | HEVC/H.265 compressed video stream with embedded payload data is output for storage or transmission; |

_{12} | Output the key ${K}_{BCH}=\{n,k,t,\kappa \}$, if BCH error correcting code is used, where $n,k,t$ are parameters of BCH coding OR if Turbo coding is used, output key ${K}_{Turbo}=\{seq,{k}_{t},\kappa \}$, where $seq=\{3,1,0,3\}$ or $seq=\{2,6,4,5,1,3\}$ (See Section 5.3); |

Algorithm 3: Extraction | |

Data: H.265/HEVC compressed video with embedded data, key | |

Result: Extracted payload data | |

_{1} | Begin entropy decoding of the compressed video; |

_{2} | Extract all $4\times 4$, $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ luma TUs from I-frames; |

_{3} | Measure JSD-SM block coarseness ${C}_{JSD-SM}$ of all $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ luma blocks using Algorithm 1 in spatial domain; |

_{4} | Sort the two groups of $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ blocks on the basis of ${C}_{JSD-SM}$ value; |

_{5} | Select $\kappa $ % most coarse blocks in each group of $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ luma TUs; |

_{6} | Extract embedded bits from all $4\times 4$ and selected $8\times 8$ and $16\times 16$ luma TU blocks using SME(1,3,7) extraction process as described in Section 5.2; |

_{7} | Combine all data to get the BCH or Turbo encoded data ${D}_{e}^{\prime}$ that possibly contains some errors due to unreliable transmission or re-compression attack; |

_{8} | If ${D}_{e}^{\prime}$ is BCH encoded, decode using Berelkamp’s iterative algorithm [44]; |

_{9} | If ${D}_{e}^{\prime}$ is Turbo encoded, decode with Soft-Output Viterbi algorithm (SOVA) [45]; |

_{10} | Decoded data ${D}^{\prime}$ is output as the extracted data; |

## 6. Experimental Results and Discussion

#### 6.1. Visual Quality and Payload Capacity

#### 6.2. Robustness Performance

#### 6.3. Bit-Rate Increase

#### 6.4. JSD-SM Coarness Measure Analysis

#### 6.5. Computation Time

- A.
- Average data pre-processing and data encoding time: in this step, the data to be embedded are first converted to binary bit-stream from its original format. Then, they are encoded in one of the schemes of BCH or Turbo coding described in Section 5.3. Different schemes of BCH and Turbo encoding take slightly different time. The average time taken by all the proposed schemes is considered.
- B.
- block selection using proposed JSD-SM technique as described in Section 5.1
- C.
- data embedding using SME(1,3,7) technique as described in Section 5.2
- D.
- total time: The total time taken to complete the whole embedding process. This includes A, B, C and rest of the usual HEVC process such as motion vector analysis, quantisation, entropy coding, etc.

- M.
- Block selection using the proposed JSD-SM technique
- N.
- Data extraction using SME(1,3,7) technique
- O.
- Data decoding using one of the proposed schemes of Turbo/BCH coding and post processing
- P.
- Total time that includes M, N, O and rest of the HEVC decoding steps, e.g., inverse DST/DCT, quantisation, etc.

## 7. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Ohm, J.R.; Sullivan, G.J.; Schwarz, H.; Tan, T.K.; Wiegand, T. Comparison of the coding efficiency of video coding standards—Including high efficiency video coding (HEVC). IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2012**, 22, 1669–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chang, P.C.; Chung, K.L.; Chen, J.J.; Lin, C.H.; Lin, T.J. A DCT/DST-based error propagation-free data hiding algorithm for HEVC intra-coded frames. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent.
**2014**, 25, 239–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Li, Z.; Ma, X.; Liu, J. A robust data hiding algorithm for H.264/AVC video streams. J. Syst. Softw.
**2013**, 86, 2174–2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Hu, M.; Ma, X.; Zhao, H. A new robust data hiding method for H.264/AVC without intra-frame distortion drift. Neurocomputing
**2015**, 151, 1076–1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ma, X.; Li, Z.; Tu, H.; Zhang, B. A data hiding algorithm for H. 264/AVC video streams without intra-frame distortion drift. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2010**, 20, 1320–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xu, D.; Wang, R.; Shi, Y.Q. Data hiding in encrypted H. 264/AVC video streams by codeword substitution. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur.
**2014**, 9, 596–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Niu, K.; Yang, X.; Zhang, Y. A novel video reversible data hiding algorithm using motion vector for H. 264/AVC. Tsinghua Sci. Technol.
**2017**, 22, 489–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ma, Z.; Huang, J.; Jiang, M.; Niu, X. A video watermarking DRM method based on H. 264 compressed domain with low bit-rate increasement. Chin. J. Electron.
**2016**, 25, 641–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lin, T.J.; Chung, K.L.; Chang, P.C.; Huang, Y.H.; Liao, H.Y.M.; Fang, C.Y. An improved DCT-based perturbation scheme for high capacity data hiding in H.264/AVC intra frames. J. Syst. Softw.
**2013**, 86, 604–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Stutz, T.; Autrusseau, F.; Uhl, A. Non-blind structure-preserving substitution watermarking of H. 264/CAVLC inter-frames. IEEE Trans. Multimed.
**2014**, 16, 1337–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ogawa, K.; Ohtake, G. Watermarking for HEVC/H.265 stream. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 9–12 January 2015; pp. 102–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, S.; Zhao, H.; Liu, S. A new data hiding method for H.265/HEVC video streams without intra-frame distortion drift. Multimed. Tools Appl.
**2018**. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Dutta, T.; Gupta, H.P. A robust watermarking framework for High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC)—Encoded video with blind extraction process. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent.
**2016**, 38, 29–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Chen, L.; Hu, M.; Jia, Z.; Jia, S.; Zhao, H. A reversible data hiding method for H. 264 with Shamir’s (t, n)-threshold secret sharing. Neurocomputing
**2016**, 188, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Swati, S.; Hayat, K.; Shahid, Z. A watermarking scheme for high efficiency video coding (HEVC). PLoS ONE
**2014**, 9, e105613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Zhao, H.; Liu, S.; Feng, C.; Liu, S. A robust and improved visual quality data hiding method for HEVC. IEEE Access
**2018**, 6, 53984–53997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gaj, S.; Sur, A.; Bora, P.K. A robust watermarking scheme against re-compression attack for H. 265/HEVC. In Proceedings of the 2015 Fifth National Conference on Computer Vision, Pattern Recognition, Image Processing and Graphics (NCVPRIPG), Patna, India, 16–19 December 2015; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Tew, Y.; Wong, K. Information hiding in HEVC standard using adaptive coding block size decision. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Paris, France, 27–30 October 2014; pp. 5502–5506. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Y.; Li, Z.; Xie, W.; Zhang, Z. High capacity and multilevel information hiding algorithm based on pu partition modes for HEVC videos. Multimed. Tools Appl.
**2019**, 78, 8423–8446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bo, P.; Jie, Y. A Reversible Information Hiding Method Based on HEVC. IFAC-PapersOnLine
**2018**, 51, 238–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Thiesse, J.M.; Jung, J.; Antonini, M. Rate distortion data hiding of motion vector competition information in chroma and luma samples for video compression. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2011**, 21, 729–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Aly, H.A. Data hiding in motion vectors of compressed video based on their associated prediction error. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur.
**2010**, 6, 14–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sullivan, G.J.; Ohm, J.R.; Han, W.J.; Wiegand, T. Overview of the high efficiency video coding (HEVC) standard. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2012**, 22, 1649–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sole, J.; Joshi, R.; Nguyen, N.; Ji, T.; Karczewicz, M.; Clare, G.; Henry, F.; Duenas, A. Transform coefficient coding in HEVC. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2012**, 22, 1765–1777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sze, V.; Budagavi, M.; Sullivan, G.J. High efficiency video coding (HEVC). Integr. Circuit Syst. Algorithms Archit. Springer
**2014**, 39, 40. [Google Scholar] - Pastuszak, G. Flexible architecture design for H. 265/HEVC inverse transform. Circuits Syst. Signal Process.
**2015**, 34, 1931–1945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wiegand, T.; Sullivan, G.J.; Bjontegaard, G.; Luthra, A. Overview of the H. 264/AVC video coding standard. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2003**, 13, 560–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Marpe, D.; Schwarz, H.; Wiegand, T. Context-based adaptive binary arithmetic coding in the H. 264/AVC video compression standard. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol.
**2003**, 13, 620–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Li, Z.; Ma, X.; Liu, J. A robust without intra-frame distortion drift data hiding algorithm based on H. 264/AVC. Multimed. Tools Appl.
**2014**, 72, 613–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mstafa, R.J.; Elleithy, K.M. A high payload video steganography algorithm in DWT domain based on BCH codes (15, 11). In Proceedings of the 2015 Wireless Telecommunications Symposium (WTS), New York, NY, USA, 15–17 April 2015; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Mstafa, R.J.; Elleithy, K.M. A DCT-based robust video steganographic method using BCH error correcting codes. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Long Island Systems, Applications and Technology Conference (LISAT), Farmingdale, NY, USA, 29 April 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Yoo, H.; Jung, J.; Jo, J.; Park, I.C. Area-efficient multimode encoding architecture for long BCH codes. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs
**2013**, 60, 872–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hagenauer, J.; Offer, E.; Papke, L. Iterative decoding of binary block and convolutional codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory
**1996**, 42, 429–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Massey, J. Shift-register synthesis and BCH decoding. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory
**1969**, 15, 122–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Berrou, C.; Glavieux, A.; Thitimajshima, P. Near Shannon limit error-correcting coding and decoding: Turbo-codes. 1. In Proceedings of the ICC’93—IEEE International Conference on Communications, Geneva, Switzerland, 23–26 May 1993; Volume 2, pp. 1064–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Endres, D.M.; Schindelin, J.E. A new metric for probability distributions. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory
**2003**, 49, 1858–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Chan, C.K.; Cheng, L. Hiding data in images by simple {LSB} substitution. Pattern Recognit.
**2004**, 37, 469–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, B.; He, J.; Huang, J.; Shi, Y.Q. A survey on image steganography and steganalysis. J. Inf. Hiding Multimed. Signal Process.
**2011**, 2, 142–172. [Google Scholar] - Wang, R.Z.; Lin, C.F.; Lin, J.C. Image hiding by optimal LSB substitution and genetic algorithm. Pattern Recognit.
**2001**, 34, 671–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Roque, J.J.; Minguet, J.M. SLSB: Improving the Steganographic Algorithm LSB. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Security in Information Systems (WOSIS 2009), Milan, Italy, 6–7 May 2009; pp. 57–66. [Google Scholar]
- Gutub, A.A.A. Pixel indicator technique for RGB image steganography. J. Emerg. Technol. Web Intell.
**2010**, 2, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fridrich, J.; Lisoněk, P.; Soukal, D. On steganographic embedding efficiency. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Information Hiding, Alexandria, VA, USA, 10–12 July 2006; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; pp. 282–296. [Google Scholar]
- Fridrich, J.; Soukal, D. Matrix embedding for large payloads. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur.
**2006**, 1, 390–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Berlekamp, E.R. Non-Binary BCH Decoding; Technical Report; Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University: Raleigh, NC, USA, 1966. [Google Scholar]
- Hagenauer, J.; Hoeher, P. A Viterbi algorithm with soft-decision outputs and its applications. In Proceedings of the 1989 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference and Exhibition‘Communications Technology for the 1990s and Beyond’, Dallas, TX, USA, 27–30 November 1989; pp. 1680–1686. [Google Scholar]
- University of Hannover. High Resolution Video Datasets. 2013. Available online: http://ftp.tnt.uni-hannover.de/testsequences (accessed on 7 July 2019).
- Li, Z.; Meng, L.; Jiang, X.; Li, Z. High Capacity HEVC Video Hiding Algorithm Based on EMD Coded PU Partition Modes. Symmetry
**2019**, 11, 1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Richardson, I.E. H. 264 and MPEG-4 Video Compression: Video Coding for Next-Generation Multimedia; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]

**Figure 3.**(

**Left**) HEVC coding tree unit (CTU) and its division into smaller coding blocks (CB) and transform blocks (TB); and (

**Right**) the CTU quad-tree.

**Figure 8.**Embedding two groups of three bits of messages in blocks of seven QTCs by modifying only two QTCs using the SME(1,3,7) technique. The original $4\times 4$ block is on the left. On the right, the modified QTCs are shown in circles.

**Figure 9.**Block diagram of the half-rate, 8-state constituent recursive convolution encoder $C{E}_{1}$ and $C{E}_{2}$ with constraint length 4.

**Figure 13.**Frames on the leftmost column, i.e., (

**a**,

**d**,

**g**,

**j**) are the original frames from the original YUV video sequences container, news, mobile and akiyo, from top to bottom. The frames in the middle column (

**b**,

**e**,

**h**,

**k**) are the corresponding frames from HEVC video sequences, compressed with $QP=30$, but with no embedded data. The rightmost column (

**c**,

**f**,

**i**,

**l**) shows the frames from the HEVC compressed video sequences with data embedded with the proposed method.

**Figure 14.**Enlarged $32\times 32$ segments on the left column are from the first I-frames of the HEVC compressed (with $QP=30$) video sequences Container, News, Mobile and Akiyo, from top to bottom. The middle column shows the corresponding enlarged frames with embedded data. The right hand column shows the absolute value difference matrices between the segments with and without embedded data.

**Figure 15.**Four specimen $16\times 16$ luma TU blocks from the second I-frame of the Akiyo video sequence. The top left block is a unselected block as it contains little variation of luminosity. Other three blocks were selected as these has high coarseness as per JSD-SM coarseness measure.

**Figure 16.**Data embedding capacity of the six video sequences at $QP=30$ with different values of $\kappa $.

**Figure 17.**PSNR values attained with the six video sequences at different values of $\kappa $, when BCH(7,4,1) error correcting scheme is used in conjunction with SME(1,3,7) data embedding technique.

**Table 1.**BCH coding schemes with three different sets of values of parameters $n,k$ and t used in the proposed work.

Name | n | k | t | Generator Polynomial |
---|---|---|---|---|

BCH$(7,4,1)$ | 7 | 4 | 1 | 1 011 |

BCH$(31,16,3)$ | 31 | 16 | 3 | 1 000 111 110 101 111 |

BCH$(31,11,5)$ | 31 | 11 | 5 | 101 100 010 011 011 010 101 |

**Table 2.**Turbo coding schemes with two different sets of values of parameters $n,k$ and t and constraint length used in the proposed work.

Name | Seed $\left({\mathit{X}}_{0}\right)$ | m | a | c | Sequence | Constraint Length ${\mathit{K}}_{\mathit{t}}$ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Turbo-16 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | $\{3,1,0,2\}$ | 16 |

Turbo-24 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 0 | $\{2,6,4,5,1,3\}$ | 24 |

Name | Resolution | RAW Format | HEVC GOP Length | GOP Conguration |
---|---|---|---|---|

Container | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

News | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

Mobile | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

Akiyo | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

Coastguard | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

Foreman | $352\times 288\phantom{\rule{0.166667em}{0ex}}\left(CIF\right)$ | YUV | 10 | IBPBPBPBPB |

**Table 4.**The PSNR values attained at with different coding schemes of the proposed method. PSNR${}_{1}$ denotes the measured quality difference between the original YUV video sequences and the HEVC encoded video sequences with $QP=30$, but no data are embedded. PSNR${}_{2}$ values represent the attained quality when data are embedded in HEVC compressed video with $QP=30$.

Video | PSNR ${}_{1}$$(\mathit{QP}=30)$ | PSNR ${}_{2}$$(\mathit{QP}=30)$ and SME$(1,3,7)$ and Following Error Codes | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

B(7,4,1) | B(31,16,3) | B(31,11,5) | T $({\mathit{K}}_{\mathit{t}}=16)$ | T $({\mathit{K}}_{\mathit{t}}=24)$ | ||

Container | 39.41 | 38.25 | 38.37 | 38.28 | 38.06 | 38.22 |

News | 38.96 | 38.00 | 37.81 | 37.93 | 37.90 | 37.94 |

Mobile | 39.82 | 38.99 | 38.98 | 38.76 | 38.53 | 38.71 |

Akiyo | 39.75 | 38.05 | 37.99 | 38.20 | 38.02 | 38.18 |

Coastguard | 39.83 | 38.31 | 38.26 | 38.33 | 37.97 | 38.01 |

Foreman | 39.47 | 38.73 | 38.28 | 38.36 | 38.53 | 38.24 |

Video | Liu et al. [4] | Liu et al. [14] | SME(1,3,7) + BCH(7,4,1) | SME(1,3,7) + Turbo$({\mathit{K}}_{\mathit{t}}=24)$ | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

PSNR | Capacity | PSNR | Capacity | PSNR | Capacity | PSNR | Capacity | |

Container | 36.50 | 171 | 36.44 | 120 | 38.25 | 412 | 38.22 | 338 |

News | 36.50 | 171 | 36.95 | 132 | 38.00 | 434 | 37.94 | 346 |

Mobile | 36.50 | 171 | 34.24 | 172 | 38.99 | 518 | 38.71 | 392 |

Akiyo | 36.50 | 171 | 38.63 | 124 | 38.05 | 446 | 38.18 | 354 |

Coastguard | 36.50 | 171 | – | – | 38.31 | 438 | 39.01 | 348 |

Foreman | 36.50 | 171 | – | – | 38.73 | 422 | 38.24 | 336 |

**Table 6.**Survival rate of the proposed method at different $QP$ values when BCH(7,4,1), BCH(31,16,3), BCH(31,11,5), Turbo$({K}_{t}=16)$ and Turbo$({K}_{t}=124)$ error correcting codes are used. Performances of these codes have been compared to the performance of the methods of Swati et al. [15] and Liu et al. [14].

Video | QP | BCH(7,4,1) | BCH(31,16,3) | BCH(31,11,5) | Turbo$\left(16\right)$ | Turbo$\left(24\right)$ | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Container | 29 | 63% | 61% | 74.22% | 81.01% | 95.10% | 96.00% | 96.10% |

30 | 65% | 78% | 89.04% | 97.07% | 99.02% | 98.56% | 99.72% | |

31 | 78% | 80% | 91.17% | 98.99% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

32 | 87% | 83% | 92.50% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

33 | 61% | 85% | 94.50% | 99% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

34 | 61% | 54% | 76.66% | 88.45% | 94.05% | 95.44% | 98.29% | |

35 | 42% | 22% | 64.53% | 79.10% | 83.87% | 89.39% | 91.44% | |

News | 29 | 60% | 59% | 82.41% | 92.15% | 94.61% | 96.20% | 96.35% |

30 | 63% | 82% | 88.23% | 97.82% | 99.98% | 99.99% | 99.99% | |

31 | 56% | 80% | 90.84% | 99.95% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

32 | 70% | 81% | 89.90% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

33 | 46% | 85% | 91.92% | 99.98% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

34 | 44% | 38% | 76.61% | 91.40% | 93.00% | 95.16% | 96.60% | |

35 | 42% | 31% | 63.96% | 84.35% | 88.55% | 91.25% | 92.91% | |

Mobile | 29 | 59% | 60% | 80.95% | 92.18% | 94.61% | 97.01% | 98.77% |

30 | 63% | 77% | 85.77% | 97.83% | 99.24% | 99.89% | 99.98% | |

31 | 65% | 82% | 90.50% | 98.59% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

32 | 71% | 85% | 92.94% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

33 | 67% | 68% | 91.97% | 98.00% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

34 | 59% | 59% | 77.90% | 92.49% | 93.28% | 95.10% | 96.62% | |

35 | 51% | 44% | 69.09% | 87.35% | 88.94% | 92.56% | 92.99% |

Attack Type | Liu et al. [16] | Swati et al. [15] | Liu et al. [14] | Proposed (avg) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

SIM | BER | SIM | BER | SIM | BER | SIM | BER | ||

No attack | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |

Re-quantisation attack | QP = 30 | 0.94 | 6 | 0.62 | 38.35 | 0.80 | 22.40 | 0.98 | 2 |

QP = 31 | 1 | 0 | 0.80 | 22.34 | 0.81 | 20.70 | 1 | 0 | |

QP = 32 | 1 | 0 | 0.86 | 15.60 | 0.85 | 17.20 | 1 | 0 | |

Qp = 33 | 0.96 | 4 | 0.58 | 42.50 | 0.85 | 16.30 | 0.98 | 2 | |

QP = 34 | 0.80 | 22 | 0.58 | 42.20 | 0.50 | 45.98 | 0.88 | 11 |

Video | Liu et al. [14] | Proposed Method (SME with Following Error Codes) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

BCH(7,4,1) | BCH(31,16,3) | BCH(31,11,5) | Turbo(16) | Turbo(24) | ||

Container | 2.7 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 |

News | 2.8 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 |

Mobile | 4.0 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.05 |

Akiyo | 1.4 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.05 |

Coastguard | - | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.06 |

Foreman | - | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.06 |

**Table 9.**Comparison of average bit-rate increment of the proposed work with that of recent state-of-art techniques that used other video datasets.

Technique | Video Dataset | Bit Rate Increase (avg.) |
---|---|---|

Liu et al. [16] | ParkScene ($1920\times 1080$), FourPeople ($1280\times 720$), KirstenAndSara ($1280\times 720$), etc. PartyScene ($832\times 480$), BQMall ($832\times 480$), RaceHorses ($416\times 240$) | 0.785% |

Li et al. [47] | BasketBallDrive ($1920\times 1080$), ParkScene ($1920\times 1080$), BQTerrace ($1920\times 1080$), Kimono ($1920\times 1080$), ChinaSpeed ($1024\times 768$), Keiba ($832\times 480$), etc. | 0.014% |

Proposed | Container ($352\times 288$), News ($352\times 288$), Mobile ($352\times 288$), Akiyo ($352\times 288$), Coastguard ($352\times 288$) and Foreman ($352\times 288$) | 0.031% |

Name | A | B | C | D |
---|---|---|---|---|

Container | 0.6 | 32.6 | 11.8 | 221.2 |

News | 0.6 | 31.4 | 12.3 | 224.7 |

Mobile | 0.6 | 33.8 | 11.9 | 229.0 |

Akiyo | 0.6 | 33.7 | 12.1 | 219.8 |

Coastguard | 0.6 | 32.2 | 12.3 | 224.2 |

Foreman | 0.6 | 33.0 | 11.9 | 232.3 |

Name | M | N | O | P |
---|---|---|---|---|

Container | 31.4 | 13.2 | 1.3 | 102.8 |

News | 32.6 | 12.8 | 1.4 | 105.1 |

Mobile | 33.1 | 13.1 | 1.6 | 110.7 |

Akiyo | 32.7 | 14.0 | 1.4 | 108.5 |

Coastguard | 31.4 | 13.5 | 1.5 | 111.8 |

Foreman | 32.3 | 13.2 | 1.6 | 118.0 |

© 2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Biswas, K.
A Robust and High Capacity Data Hiding Method for H.265/HEVC Compressed Videos with Block Roughness Measure and Error Correcting Techniques. *Symmetry* **2019**, *11*, 1360.
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11111360

**AMA Style**

Biswas K.
A Robust and High Capacity Data Hiding Method for H.265/HEVC Compressed Videos with Block Roughness Measure and Error Correcting Techniques. *Symmetry*. 2019; 11(11):1360.
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11111360

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Biswas, Kusan.
2019. "A Robust and High Capacity Data Hiding Method for H.265/HEVC Compressed Videos with Block Roughness Measure and Error Correcting Techniques" *Symmetry* 11, no. 11: 1360.
https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11111360