DMCA has pushed me to my limit.

[Declan McCullagh]

Ah, but your assumptions are not quite right. See my Wired News
article on steganalysis.

-Declan


On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 09:34:15AM -0700, David Honig wrote:
> At 08:07 AM 7/18/01 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote:
> >I keep looking at the whole stego thing.  But the basic problem 
> >remains the same.  Stego relies on the *method* being secret, 
> >which stands in stark contrast to kerchoff's principle.  I mean, 
> >sure, you can stego encrypted stuff so nobody who recovers it 
> >can read it, but if you use any of the "available" programs, 
> >there will always be utilities that can detect your encrypted 
> >stuff and, usually, extract it.
> 
> 1. encrypted data is indisttinguishable from uniformly distributed noise
> 2. LSBs in digitizations of analog signals are noise
> 3. ignoring the nuance of different LSB distributions, how can you
> distinguish a stego'd from unaltered file?
> 
> Stego by itself is much less interesting than stego'd encrypted data
> (with idenntifying headers stripped of course)
> 
> That spam, mp3, or image could be merely a transport for more privledged
> info.  Posting /reading to a public newsgroup solves traffic-analysis
> issues too.