I always mispell it stenography by accident, just commenting so I can find this awesome post in search later when I inevitably type it wrong!
A Recipe for Steganogravy
31–33 of 33 posts
Re: A Recipe for Steganogravy
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
In principle the output is arbitrarily natural-looking. The arithmetic coding procedure effectively turns your secret message into a stream of bits that is statistically indistinguishable from random, the same as you pull out of your PRNG in normal generation.
Yes, with a few gotchas, especially related to end handling. If the government extracts the hidden bits from possibly stego-streams, and half of the ones theyv encounter give an "unexpected end of input" error, but yours never give that error, they will know that your hidden bit streams likely contain some message. You can avoid it by using a bijective arithmetic encoder, which by definition never encounters an "unex…
yeah, encrypting the bits before embedding seems like a valid first step... even if someone suspects steganography, they still can't read it
Re: A Recipe for Steganogravy
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this actually embed the data using stenography, or does it just append it (encrypted) to an area of the file that the carrier format doesn't care about? The advantage of stenography is that it should be difficult for a middleman to know that there even is any data embedded.
You can save the resulting carrier file and open it any default file viewer of your OS. including ios, macos, windows etc. Regarding being detected, like anything else in security it is always a cat and mouse game.
Can you answer the question?