DarkJPEG
n0where.net
DarkJPEG
1–10 of 27 posts
Re: DarkJPEG
#2Doh, some of these options seem horrible: eg, allowing the data to be extracted automatically using standard tools. If you can automatically detect hidden data, it's only hidden from people who aren't looking. If your data is worth hiding, it's worth hiding from people who know how to use "find -exec" (or had someone else set up an automated sweep program for them).
Re: DarkJPEG
#3What, pray, is "SHA3 key generation"
Re: DarkJPEG
#4What, pray, is "SHA3 key generation"
Well it's got to be super sekrit so it needs the best SHA algorithm, what better than the one that even the NSA hasn't picked yet? :-)
Re: DarkJPEG
#5Re: DarkJPEG
#6Props for using social media share nag images that do not load from Twitter/Facebook/Google until click. :) Better speed and better privacy for end users.
Re: DarkJPEG
#7Props for using social media share nag images that do not load from Twitter/Facebook/Google until click. :) Better speed and better privacy for end users.
[deleted]
Re: DarkJPEG
#8is there any evidence that the steganography here is undetectable? i would have thought that uniformly random data in the low bits of an image's data (pixels or fourier coefficients or whatever) was a clear signature for anyone trying to find these things. aren't they naturally correlated in various ways?
also, something like tineye can be used to retrieve web-sourced images for comparison, which would make any hidden data really obvious (and a smooth gradient would be even more suspicious if the lowest bits weren't smooth).
what is the state of the art in steganography? is it feasible for reasonable bandwidth? what are the best carrier data to use? do phone cameras provide raw images or are they always jpegs? i guess a webcam video uploaded to youtube has the advantages of large data volume, unique content, and wide visibility. but do they reformat?
Re: DarkJPEG
#9Re: DarkJPEG
#10is there any evidence that the steganography here is undetectable? i would have thought that uniformly random data in the low bits of an image's data (pixels or fourier coefficients or whatever) was a clear signature for anyone trying to find these things. aren't they naturally correlated in various ways? also, something like tineye can be used to retrieve web-sourced images for comparison, which would make any hidde…
Off course before you even get to all that, I'd be concerned about the steganographic problem where they go to your ISP's logs and see you've visited the site.