[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: standard for stegonography?

To: [email protected] (Sergey Goldgaber)
Subject: Re: standard for stegonography?
From: [email protected] (Matthew Gream)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 94 9:45:27 EST
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Sergey Goldgaber" at Feb 28, 94 03:09:25 pm
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney.
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]

Earlier, Sergey Goldgaber wrote:

> Didn't you mention something along the lines of hiding "---BEGIN PGP" headers
> by using one-time pad encryption?  Or did I wildly misinterpret you?

No. I said that, and I was referring to the case where you have a particular
stegonographic technique such as pixel modulation, it could be an idea to
place an encrypted header using something like IDEA in CFB that not only
encrypts a signature but an identifier so as to know which program actually
did the stego, and hence be able to demodulate with that particular 
technique. Therefore if you had seperate programs, each could interoperate.

Even though the essense of stego is to not know a message is hidden in a
particular medium, whenever specific software comes out to do certain stego
(jpegs etc), I can see NSA spooks adding it onto their short list of s/ware
to run across any pictures they get. Stego becomes sort of pseudo-Stego and
loses a certain amount of gain it once had (of course, if all you do is
Stego an encrypted file without any structure, it'll be safe).

My 5c.

Matthew.
-- 
Matthew Gream. ph: (02)-821-2043. [email protected].
PGPMail and brown paperbags accepted. - Non Servatum -
  ''weirdo's make the world go around'' - A.Watts

Next by Date: Re: standard for stegonography?
Next by thread: Re: standard for stegonography?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread