| Literature DB >> 35270920 |
Javaid A Kaw1, Solihah Gull1, Shabir A Parah1.
Abstract
The advancement of the Internet of Things (IoT) has transfigured the overlay of the physical world by superimposing digital information in various sectors, including smart cities, industry, healthcare, etc. Among the various shared information, visual data are an insensible part of smart cities, especially in healthcare. As a result, visual-IoT research is gathering momentum. In visual-IoT, visual sensors, such as cameras, collect critical multimedia information about industries, healthcare, shopping, autonomous vehicles, crowd management, etc. In healthcare, patient-related data are captured and then transmitted via insecure transmission lines. The security of this data are of paramount importance. Besides the fact that visual data requires a large bandwidth, the gap between communication and computation is an additional challenge for visual IoT system development. In this paper, we present SVIoT, a Secure Visual-IoT framework, which addresses the issues of both data security and resource constraints in IoT-based healthcare. This was achieved by proposing a novel reversible data hiding (RDH) scheme based on One Dimensional Neighborhood Mean Interpolation (ODNMI). The use of ODNMI reduces the computational complexity and storage/bandwidth requirements by 50 percent. We upscaled the original image from M × N to M ± 2N, dissimilar to conventional interpolation methods, wherein images are upscaled to 2M × 2N. We made use of an innovative mechanism, Left Data Shifting (LDS), before embedding data in the cover image. Before embedding the data, we encrypted it using an AES-128 encryption algorithm to offer additional security. The use of LDS ensures better perceptual quality at a relatively high payload. We achieved an average PSNR of 43 dB for a payload of 1.5 bpp (bits per pixel). In addition, we embedded a fragile watermark in the cover image to ensure authentication of the received content.Entities:
Keywords: bandwidth; computational complexity; information hiding; reversibility; security; visual-IoT
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35270920 PMCID: PMC8914708 DOI: 10.3390/s22051773
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1A typical smart-health system.
Figure 2Block diagram of the proposed scheme.
Figure 3(a) Original image block; (b) Generation of the cover image using ODNMI.
Figure 4Various test images.
Figure 5Watermark.
Objective quality indices for Technique-1 and Technique-2.
| Image No | Technique-1 | Technique-2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSNR (dB) | SSIM | %BER | PSNR(dB) | SSIM | %BER | |
| 1. | 40.089 | 0.979 | 0 | 43.73 | 0.989 | 0 |
| 2. | 40.93 | 0.962 | 0 | 43.76 | 0.980 | 0 |
| 3. | 40.982 | 0.969 | 0 | 43.74 | 0.984 | 0 |
| 4. | 40.954 | 0.96 | 0 | 43.74 | 0.978 | 0 |
| 5. | 40.958 | 0.97 | 0 | 43.75 | 0.983 | 0 |
| 6. | 40.021 | 0.956 | 0 | 43.75 | 0.979 | 0 |
| 7. | 40.923 | 0.942 | 0 | 43.75 | 0.968 | 0 |
| 8. | 40.917 | 0.939 | 0 | 43.76 | 0.965 | 0 |
| 9. | 40.953 | 0.966 | 0 | 43.75 | 0.981 | 0 |
| 10. | 39.19 | 0.772 | 0 | 43.74 | 0.970 | 0 |
| 11. | 38.947 | 0.751 | 0 | 43.76 | 0.967 | 0 |
| 12. | 39.191 | 0.766 | 0 | 43.78 | 0.968 | 0 |
Comparison to state-of-the-art techniques.
| Scheme | Average PSNR (dB) | Capacity (bpp) |
|---|---|---|
| Jung et al. [ | 33.24 | 0.96 |
| Lee et al. [ | 33.79 | 1.59 |
| Parah et al. [ | 46.36 | 0.75 |
| Naheed et al. [ | 49.01 | 0.15 |
| Naheed et al. [ | 49.00 | 0.15 |
| Luo et al. [ | 48.94 | 0.14 |
| Wahed and Nyeem [ | 47.61 | 1.5 |
| Kaw et al. [ | 43.6 | 1.25 |
| Proposed | ||
| Technique-1 | 40.338 | 1.5 |
| Technique-2 | 43.75 | 1.5 |
Figure 6Subjective analysis for reversibility.
Embedding time of the proposed scheme (in seconds).
| Image | Embedding time (s) |
|---|---|
| Image: 1 | 0.4804 |
| Image: 2 | 0.4316 |
| Image: 3 | 0.4336 |
| Image: 7 | 0.4472 |
| Image: 8 | 0.4550 |
| Image: 9 | 0.4277 |
| Average | 0.4459 |
Memory usage of the NMI and proposed ODNMI schemes.
| Original Image Size | Memory Needed to Store Stego-Image Using NMI | Memory Needed to Store Stego-Image Using ODNMI |
|---|---|---|
| 512 × 512 = 256 KB | 1024 KB | 512 KB |
| 256 × 256 = 64 KB | 256 KB | 128 KB |
| 128 × 128 = 16 KB | 64 KB | 32 KB |
Figure 7Authentication and fragility analysis (Technique-1).
Figure 8Authentication and fragility analysis (Technique-2).
Authentication analysis for salt and pepper and median filtering (Techniques-1).
| Attacked Stego Image | Tech-1 Average BER (%) = 43.916 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salt and Pepper Noise | Median Filtering | |||||
| PSNR | SSIM Cover Attacked Stego | Erroneous Primary Data Bits | PSNR | SSIM Cover Attacked Stego | Erroneous Primary Data Bits | |
| Image-1 | 25.59 | 0.798 | 949 | 28.8 | 0.803 | 76410 |
| Image-2 | 25.32 | 0.733 | 956 | 39.1 | 0.963 | 96191 |
| Image-3 | 24.44 | 0.783 | 1009 | 32.54 | 0.925 | 74547 |
| Image-4 | 25.31 | 0.732 | 988 | 36.48 | 0.96 | 77441 |
| Image-5 | 25.31 | 0.778 | 970 | 33.07 | 0.91 | 74960 |
| Image-6 | 24.44 | 0.763 | 949 | 33.93 | 0.918 | 80290 |
| Image-7 | 25.27 | 0.668 | 911 | 44.21 | 0.985 | 84888 |
| Image-8 | 24.99 | 0.668 | 933 | 42.67 | 0.979 | 87739 |
| Image-9 | 25.11 | 0.743 | 1031 | 40.63 | 0.984 | 72935 |
| Image-10 | 23.65 | 0.647 | 960 | 26.7 | 0.846 | 85542 |
| Image-11 | 23.23 | 0.613 | 1015 | 31.06 | 0.885 | 87244 |
| Image-12 | 23.08 | 0.611 | 914 | 29.11 | 0.861 | 86083 |
| Av. Values | 24.64 | 0.711 | 34.85 | 0.918 | ||
Authentication analysis for salt and pepper and median filtering (Techniques-2).
| Attacked Stego Image | Tech-2 Average BER (%) = 45.148 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salt and Pepper Noise | Median Filtering | |||||
| PSNR | SSIM Cover Attacked Stego | Erroneous Primary Data Bits | PSNR | SSIM Cover Attacked Stego | Erroneous Primary Data Bits | |
| Image-1 | 25.9 | 0.815 | 2840 | 28.8 | 0.806 | 93,582 |
| Image-2 | 25.38 | 0.747 | 2795 | 39.49 | 0.967 | 88,322 |
| Image-3 | 24.44 | 0.792 | 2981 | 32.54 | 0.921 | 90,932 |
| Image-4 | 25.49 | 0.753 | 2771 | 36.72 | 0.964 | 90,184 |
| Image-5 | 25.1 | 0.777 | 2871 | 33.16 | 0.913 | 88,876 |
| Image-6 | 24.22 | 0.772 | 2346 | 34.2 | 0.93 | 94,053 |
| Image-7 | 25.27 | 0.682 | 2815 | 45.02 | 0.99 | 88,238 |
| Image-8 | 24.93 | 0.681 | 2903 | 43.39 | 0.986 | 89,726 |
| Image-9 | 25.22 | 0.753 | 2929 | 41.03 | 0.987 | 77,294 |
| Image-10 | 23.41 | 0.792 | 2017 | 26.57 | 0.793 | 96,549 |
| Image-11 | 23.39 | 0.784 | 1866 | 30.62 | 0.823 | 95,625 |
| Image-12 | 23.69 | 0.781 | 2026 | 28.85 | 0.804 | 94,576 |
| Av. Values | 24.70 | 0.760 | 35.03 | 0.907 | ||