Uri writes:

Probably creating a GIF/TIFF/whatever file yourself, with normal consumer-grade equipment (noise-prone :-) and substituting it's LSB (or whatever certainly lies BELOW the noise floor) with bits of the message, does sound like the best choice today.

..stuff elided...

Disadvantages: 1) Somebody has to do it, to write code, to buy a Camcoder (:-).

I have a couple of camcorders, a video digitizer for my Mac, a scanner (1-bit only--bought as a bundle with TypeReader, a wonderful OCR program), etc. Equipment isn't the problem, per se, it's the lack of standards (e.g., so what if *I* put a message into a GIF with Adobe Photoshop--others have to be able to extract it). We won't be seeing digitized images as carriers of secret messages in wide use anytime soon. In this sense, I agree with Uri's point.

2) May lead to outlawing of ALL the image and sound transmission via electronic media, if Big Brother gets really annoyed (:-).

Doubtful--too widespread. JPEG, MPEG, and a zillion other image standards are spreading. Big Brother can't ban images, GIFs, JPEG stuff, QuickTime movies, etc., without shutting down the economy. And digitized voice works just as well for the LSB method, albeit with a different software approach. Modem-based voice handling systems are already widespread, and the "Internet Talk Radio" concept discussed here last week indicates the feasibility of sending packetized audio. Such a mail system is already available for the NeXT, I gather. -Tim -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: MailSafe and PGP available.