Next Article in Journal
A Sensitivity Analysis of the Damage Behavior of a Leading-Edge Subject to Bird Strike
Next Article in Special Issue
Blockchain-Based Multimedia Content Protection: Review and Open Challenges
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of the Structural Performance of a Novel Methodology for Connecting Modular Units Using Straight and Cross-Shaped Connector Plates in Modular Buildings
Previous Article in Special Issue
Block-Based Steganography Method Using Optimal Selection to Reach High Efficiency and Capacity for Palette Images
Article

A False Negative Study of the Steganalysis Tool Stegdetect

1
School of Computing, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 3HE, UK
2
Department of Police Science, College of Social Sciences, University of Ulsan, Ulsan 44610, Korea
3
Department of Industrial Security, Chung-Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
4
Department of Security Management, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10(22), 8188; https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228188
Received: 7 October 2020 / Revised: 12 November 2020 / Accepted: 14 November 2020 / Published: 19 November 2020
In this study, we evaluated one of the modern automated steganalysis tools, Stegdetect, to study its false negative rates when analysing a bulk of images. In so doing, we used JPHide method to embed a randomly generated messages into 2000 JPEG images. The aim of this study is to help digital forensics analysts during their investigations by means of providing an idea of the false negative rates of Stegdetect. This study found that (1) the false negative rates depended largely on the tool’s sensitivity values, (2) the tool had a high false negative rate between the sensitivity values from 0.1 to 3.4 and (3) the best sensitivity value for detection of JPHide method was 6.2. It is therefore recommended that when analysing a huge bulk of images forensic analysts need to take into consideration sensitivity values to reduce the false negative rates of Stegdetect. View Full-Text
Keywords: steganograph; steganalysis; stegdetect; digital forensics steganograph; steganalysis; stegdetect; digital forensics
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Aziz, B.; Jung, J.; Lee, J.; Chun, Y.-T. A False Negative Study of the Steganalysis Tool Stegdetect. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8188. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228188

AMA Style

Aziz B, Jung J, Lee J, Chun Y-T. A False Negative Study of the Steganalysis Tool Stegdetect. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(22):8188. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228188

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aziz, Benjamin, Jeyong Jung, Julak Lee, and Yong-Tae Chun. 2020. "A False Negative Study of the Steganalysis Tool Stegdetect" Applied Sciences 10, no. 22: 8188. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228188

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop