stego for the censored II

[Steve Schear]

At 06:37 PM 2/10/01 +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Feb 2001, Steve Schear wrote:
>
> >I know this has been mentioned before, but it seems to me that we should
> >make use of all the great CRM watermarking technologies being
> >developed.  One of the primary goals of such technology is to hide the
> >watermark in such a way that it cannot be isolated from the source material
> >or removed by copying or filtering without making reproduction of the
> >source material unacceptably degraded.
>
>However, methods used for watermarking et cetera are not optimized for
>strict non-detection. What I mean is, they are of course meant to be
>difficult to predict down to the sample level (since that would make them
>easy to remove), but the presence of this sort of stego is often quite
>easily verified. Especially if the algorithms are well known. This is
>unacceptable in a non-watermark stego apps.
>
>Sampo Syreeni <decoy at iki.fi>, aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university

Not entirely true.  If watermarking become ubiquitous then their presence 
is no longer suspicious.  If the marks contain encrypted content then 
almost no one will know or care as they are passed and published and only 
the intended recipients will receive the messages.

steve