| Literature DB >> 34316095 |
Abstract
A novel image steganography technique in order to hide the ciphered voice data has been suggested in this work. The doctor's voice comments belonging to a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient are hidden in a medical image in order to protect the patient information. The introduced steganography technique is based on chaos theory. Firstly, the voice comments of the doctor are converted to an image and secondly, they are ciphered utilizing the suggested encryption algorithm based on a chaotic system. Then, they are embedded into the cover medical image. A lung angiography dual-energy computed tomography (CT) scan of a COVID-19 patient is used as a cover object. Numerical and security analyses of steganography method have been performed in MATLAB environment. The similarity metrics are calculated for R, G, B components of cover image and stego image as visual quality analysis metrics to examine the performance of the introduced steganography procedure. For a 512 × 512 pixel cover image, SSIM values are obtained as 0.8337, 0.7926, and 0.9273 for R, G, B components, respectively. Moreover, security analyses which are differential attack, histogram, information entropy, correlation of neighboring pixels and the initial condition sensitivity are carried out. The information entropy is calculated as 7.9993 bits utilizing the suggested steganography scheme. The mean value of the ten UACI and NPCR values are obtained as 33.5688% and 99.8069%, respectively. The results of security analysis have revealed that the presented steganography procedure is able to resist statistical attacks and the chaotic system-based steganography scheme shows the characteristics of the sensitive dependence on the initial condition and the secret key. The proposed steganography method which is based on a chaotic system has superior performance in terms of being robust against differential attack and hiding encrypted voice comments of the doctor. Moreover, the introduced algorithm is also resistant against exhaustive, known plaintext, and chosen plaintext attacks.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Chaos; Cryptography; Differential attack; Statistical attacks; Steganography; Voice hiding
Year: 2021 PMID: 34316095 PMCID: PMC8297434 DOI: 10.1007/s11071-021-06700-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nonlinear Dyn ISSN: 0924-090X Impact factor: 5.022
Fig. 1A chaos-based steganography scheme
Fig. 2The image histograms for R, G, B components a cover image, b stego image. The time series and histogram for c secret audio data, d obtained audio data
Fig. 3The correlation coefficients in the diagonal, horizon and vertical directions a cover image, b stego image
Similarity metrics between cover image and stego image in terms of R, G, B components
| Image size | CI(i,j) = SI(i,j) | SSIM | MSE | RMSE | MAE | PSNR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ∞ | ||
| 512 × 512 pixels | Red | 0.8337 | 10.9875 | 3.3147 | 2.6856 | 37.7218 |
| Green | 0.7926 | 10.2826 | 3.2066 | 2.5981 | 38.0098 | |
| Blue | 0.9273 | 2.5263 | 1.5894 | 1.2556 | 44.1060 | |
| 1024 × 1024 pixels | Red | 0.7081 | 10.9596 | 3.3105 | 2.6832 | 37.7329 |
| Green | 0.6639 | 10.2863 | 3.2072 | 2.5981 | 38.0082 | |
| Blue | 0.8645 | 2.5226 | 1.5883 | 1.2555 | 44.1122 |
The effect of Algorithms 3, 4, 5 on resisting differential attack
| NPCR (%) (5649) | UACI (%) (5649) | |
|---|---|---|
| The steganography scheme | 99.7074 | 33.5321 |
| The steganography scheme without using Algorithms 3, 4, 5 | 0.0004 | 0.000001 |
Results of NPCR and UACI tests for ten samples
| Position | (5649) | (255) | (2216) | (370) | (778) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCR (%) | 99.7074 | 99.6975 | 99.8741 | 99.7890 | 99.8680 |
| UACI (%) | 33.5321 | 33.5076 | 33.5517 | 33.5614 | 33.5977 |
| Position | (6588) | (5559) | (2537) | (7602) | (276) |
| NPCR (%) | 99.8260 | 99.6090 | 99.9062 | 99.8142 | 99.9771 |
| UACI (%) | 33.5764 | 33.5546 | 33.5778 | 33.6274 | 33.6011 |
Comparative study of NPCR, UACI and information entropy of the introduced algorithm to previous algorithms
| Images | NPCR | UACI | Entropy |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 98.465 | 35.8008 | 7.9990 |
| [ | 99.61 | 33.47 | 7.9993 |
| [ | 99.2453 | 36.4973 | 7.9970 |
| [ | 99.61 | 33.38 | 7.9980 |
| [ | 99.2172 | 33.4054 | 7.9968 |
| [ | 99.5799 | 33.4342 | 7.9852 |
| [ | 99.6058 | 33.526 | 7.9973 |
| [ | 99.6689 | 33.5561 | 7.9979 |
| [ | 99.6155 | 33.2744 | 7.9992 |
| [ | 99.61 | 33.44 | 7.9997 |
| [ | 99.6068 | 33.4597 | 7.9993 |
| [ | 99.6204 | 30.7972 | 7.9972 |
| This study | 99.8069 | 33.5688 | 7.9993 |
aThe mean value of R, G, B components is calculated
Fig. 4The histogram of the encrypted voice comments of doctor as an image
The correlation coefficient values between two neighboring pixels of the encrypted image, cover image and stego image
| Direction | 512 × 512 pixel image | 1024 × 1024 pixel image | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Encrypted image | Cover image | Stego image | Encrypted image | Cover image | Stego image | |
| Diagonal | − 0.0023 | 0.9738 | 0.9722 | − 0.0003 | 0.9928 | 0.9912 |
| Horizontal | − 0.0027 | 0.9830 | 0.9814 | 0.0009 | 0.9954 | 0.9938 |
| Vertical | 0.0045 | 0.9893 | 0.9877 | 0.0015 | 0.9973 | 0.9957 |
Fig. 5The correlation coefficient of encrypted voice comments of doctor as an image in the diagonal, horizontal and vertical directions
Fig. 6Initial condition sensitivity analysis selecting parameter with an increase of 10–16
The comparison between this study and previous studies on chaos theory
| This study | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | [ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steganography | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ||||
| Cryptography | ✗ | |||||||||||||
| Security analysis | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | |||||||||||
| Resistant to differential attack | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ |
Security analysis and differential attack analysis are not given for sound steganography implementation
Algorithm 1: Pseudorandom pixel placement
| s = 0; |
|---|
| XY = xor(X,Y); |
| YZ = xor(Y,Z); |
| s = s + 1; |
| row = X(s).*Y(s).*XY(s); |
| row = mod(row,m) + 1; |
| column = Y(s).*Z(s).*YZ(s); |
| column = mod(column,m) + 1; |
| coordinate = [row,column]; |
| coordinates_array = |
Algorithm 2: Logical XOR operation
| XY = xor(X,Y); |
| YZ = xor(Y,Z); |
| XZ = xor(X,Z); |
| R = [XY;YZ;XZ;X;Y;Z]; |
| C = C ⊕ R; |
Algorithm 3: XOR for sequential bits
| C(p,7) = xor(C(p,7), C(p,8)); |
| C(p,6) = xor(C(p,6), C(p,7)); |
| C(p,5) = xor(C(p,5), C(p,6)); |
| C(p,4) = xor(C(p,4), C(p,5)); |
| C(p,3) = xor(C(p,3), C(p,4)); |
| C(p,2) = xor(C(p,2), C(p,3)); |
| C(p,1) = xor(C(p,1), C(p,2)); |
Algorithm 4: Complement and swap
| Count the bits equal to one |
|---|
| counter = counter + 1; |
| m = mod(counter,2); |
| C(p,1:8) = |
| C_temp(p,1:8) = C(p,1:8); |
| C(p,1:4) = C_temp(p,5:8); |
| C(p,5:8) = C_temp(p,1:4); |
Algorithm 5: XOR operation with next pixel.
| XY = xor(X,Y); |
|---|
| YZ = xor(Y,Z); |
| XZ = xor(X,Z); |
| S = [X;Y;Z;XY;YZ;XZ]; |
| C(p) = C(p) ⊕ S(p); |
| C(p + 1) = C(p) ⊕ C(p + 1); |
Algorithm 6: Data hiding based on LSB method
| D(p,6:8,1) = C(p,1:3); |
| D(p,6:8,2) = C(p,4:6); |
| D(p,7:8,3) = C(p,7:8); |