RE: stegedetect & Variola's Suitcase
So here's the 'obvious' question: How fast can dedicated hardware run if it were a dedicated Stegedetect processor? In other words, how easy would it be for NSA, et al to scan 'every' photo on the internet for Stego traces? (And then, every photo being emailed?) And then, how fast can someone write a worm that will make every photo stored on a harddrive look like it's been stegoed? -TD
From: Sunder <sunder@sunder.net> To: cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net Subject: stegedetect - looks like "we" need better mice Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 05:53:08 -0400 (edt)
http://freshmeat.net/projects/stegdetect/?branch_id=52957&release_id=172055
http://www.outguess.org/detection.php
Steganography Detection with Stegdetect Stegdetect is an automated tool for detecting steganographic content in images. It is capable of detecting several different steganographic methods to embed hidden information in JPEG images. Currently, the detectable schemes are
* jsteg, * jphide (unix and windows), * invisible secrets, * outguess 01.3b, * F5 (header analysis), * appendX and camouflage.
Stegbreak is used to launch dictionary attacks against JSteg-Shell, JPHide and OutGuess 0.13b.
Stegdetect and Stegbreak have been developed by Niels Provos.
----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\ \|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\ <--*-->:and our people, and neither do we." -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/ /|\ : \|/ + v + : War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx
The answer to that question depends on some leg work which involves converting the source code to stegetect into hardware and seeing how fast that hardware runs, then multiplying by X where X is how many of the chips you can afford to build. I'd image that it's a lot faster to have some hw that gives you a yea/nay on each JPG, than to say, attempt to crack DES. ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\ \|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\ <--*-->:and our people, and neither do we." -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/ /|\ : \|/ + v + : War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
So here's the 'obvious' question:
How fast can dedicated hardware run if it were a dedicated Stegedetect processor?
In other words, how easy would it be for NSA, et al to scan 'every' photo on the internet for Stego traces? (And then, every photo being emailed?)
And then, how fast can someone write a worm that will make every photo stored on a harddrive look like it's been stegoed?
How fast can dedicated hardware run if it were a dedicated Stegedetect processor? ... In other words, how easy would it be for NSA, et al to scan 'every' photo on the internet for Stego traces? (And then, every photo being emailed?) Although I haven't looked at the code behind stegedetect yet, I can assume that a single dedicated processor would be less efficient that
And then, how fast can someone write a worm that will make every photo stored on a harddrive look like it's been stegoed? Again, you'd have to decide between real and fake steg. Appending a fortune message to the end of an image would be really quick, and would alert stegedetect. But if you want to signal the nsa, you'd need real steg with real (but breakable) crypto. The difference is quick
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:22:28 -0400, Tyler Durden <camera_lumina@hotmail.com> wrote: perhaps two or three dedicated processors. Some steg (appendx, camouflage) isn't steg, just data appended to the end of the file, in valid jpeg encapsulation. Real steg (f5, jsteg, jphide, steghide) would require looking at more data, for more time. it would be a waste to have the same processor working on appended data and real steg. Quick answer: I don't know / Depends on the data. perl script versus a modified jpeg library. who are ya tryin to fool? -pantosys@gmail.com
participants (3)
-
Joseph Holsten -
Sunder -
Tyler Durden