Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 4, pp 4801–4834 | Cite as

Large-scale evaluation of splicing localization algorithms for web images

  • Markos Zampoglou
  • Symeon Papadopoulos
  • Yiannis Kompatsiaris
Article

Abstract

With the proliferation of smartphones and social media, journalistic practices are increasingly dependent on information and images contributed by local bystanders through Internet-based applications and platforms. Verifying the images produced by these sources is integral to forming accurate news reports, given that there is very little or no control over the type of user-contributed content, and hence, images found on the Web are always likely to be the result of image tampering. In particular, image splicing, i.e. the process of taking an area from one image and placing it in another is a typical such tampering practice, often used with the goal of misinforming or manipulating Internet users. Currently, the localization of splicing traces in images found on the Web is a challenging task. In this work, we present the first, to our knowledge, exhaustive evaluation of today’s state-of-the-art algorithms for splicing localization, that is, algorithms attempting to detect which pixels in an image have been tampered with as the result of such a forgery. As our aim is the application of splicing localization on images found on the Web and social media environments, we evaluate a large number of algorithms aimed at this problem on datasets that match this use case, while also evaluating algorithm robustness in the face of image degradation due to JPEG recompressions. We then extend our evaluations to a large dataset we formed by collecting real-world forgeries that have circulated the Web during the past years. We review the performance of the implemented algorithms and attempt to draw broader conclusions with respect to the robustness of splicing localization algorithms for application in Web environments, their current weaknesses, and the future of the field. Finally, we openly share the framework and the corresponding algorithm implementations to allow for further evaluations and experimentation.

Keywords

Image forensics Image splicing Forgery localization Web multimedia verification 

References

  1. 1.
    Amerini I, Becarelli R, Caldelli R, Del Mastio A (2014) Splicing forgeries localization through the use of first digit features. IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS) 143–148.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ardizzone E, Bruno A, Mazzola G (2015) Copy-move forgery detection by matching triangles of keypoints. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 10:2084–2094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bianchi T, Piva A (2012a) Detection of nonaligned double JPEG compression based on integer periodicity maps. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 7:842–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bianchi T, Piva A (2012b) Image forgery localization via block-grained analysis of JPEG artifacts. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 7:1003–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bianchi T, De Rosa A, Piva A (2011) Improved DCT coefficient analysis for forgery localization in JPEG images. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) 2444–2447Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Birajdar GK, Mankar VH (2013) Digital image forgery detection using passive techniques: a survey. Digit Investig 10:226–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    “CASIA TIDEv2.0” (2009) http://forensics.idealtest.org/casiav2/ (Accessed 20–03-2016)
  8. 8.
    Chang IC, Yu JC, Chang CC (2013) A forgery detection algorithm for exemplar-based inpainting images using multi-region relation. Image Vis Comput 31:57–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen M, Fridrich J, Goljan M, Lukás J (2008) Determining image origin and integrity using sensor noise. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 3:74–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chierchia G, Poggi G, Sansone C, Verdoliva L (2014) A Bayesian-MRF approach for PRNU-based image forgery detection. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 9:554–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Christlein V, Riess C, Jordan J, Riess C, Angelopoulou E (2012) An evaluation of popular copy-move forgery detection. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 7:1841–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    “Columbia image splicing detection evaluation dataset”. (2004) http://www.ee.columbia.edu/ln/dvmm/downloads/AuthSplicedDataSet/AuthSplicedDataSet.htm (Accessed 20–03-2016)
  13. 13.
    Cozzolino D, Gragnaniello D, Verdoliva L (2014a) Image forgery localization through the fusion of camera-based, feature-based and pixel-based techniques. IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) 5302–5306Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cozzolino D, Gragnaniello D, Verdoliva L (2014b) Image forgery detection through residual-based local descriptors and block-matching. IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pp. 5297–5301Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cozzolino D, Poggi G, Verdoliva L (2015a) Efficient dense-field copy-move forgery detection. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 11:2284–2297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cozzolino D, Poggi G, Verdoliva L (2015b) Splicebuster: A new blind image splicing detector. IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS) 1–6.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Carvalho T, Riess C, Angelopoulou E, Pedrini H, de Rezende Rocha A (2013) Exposing digital image forgeries by illumination color classification. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 8:1182–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de O. Costa F, Oikawa MA, Dias Z, Goldenstein S, de Rocha AR (2014) Image phylogeny forests reconstruction. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 10:1533–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Oliveira AA, Ferrara P, de Rosa A, Piva A, Barni M, Goldenstein S, Dias Z, Rocha A (2016) Multiple parenting phylogeny relationships in digital images. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 2:328–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Diane N, Nanda W, Xingming S, Moise FK (2014) A survey of partition-based techniques for copy-move forgery detection. Sci World J 1:1–13Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Emir D, Memon N (2009) Image tamper detection based on demosaicing artifacts. International Conference on Image Processing 1497–1500Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farid H (2009) Exposing digital forgeries from JPEG ghosts. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 4:154–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ferrara P, Bianchi T, De Rosa A, Piva A (2012) Image forgery localization via fine-grained analysis of CFA artifacts. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 7:1566–1577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ferrara P, Fontani M, Bianchi T, de Rosa A, Piva A, Barni M (2015) Unsupervised fusion for forgery localization exploiting background information. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops 1–6.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fontani M, Bianchi T, de Rosa A, Piva A, Barni M (2013) A framework for decision fusion in image forensics based on Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 8:593–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gaborini L, Bestagini P, Milani S, Tagliasacchi M, Tubaro S (2015) Multi-clue image tampering localization. IEEE National Conference on Parallel Computing Technologies (PARCOMPTECH):125–130Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    He Z, Wei L, Sun W, Huang J (2012) Digital image splicing detection based on Markov features in DCT and DWT domain. Pattern Recogn 45:4292–4299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hsu YF, Chang SF (2006) Detecting image splicing using geometry invariants and camera characteristics consistency. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo 549–552.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Irene A, Becarelli R, Caldelli R, Casini M (2015) A feature-based forensic procedure for splicing forgeries detection. Math Probl Eng. doi:10.1155/2015/653164 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kakar P, Sudha N, Ser W (2011) Exposing digital image forgeries by detecting discrepancies in motion blur. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 13:443–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kee E, O’Brien J, Farid H (2014) Exposing photo manipulation from shading and shadows. ACM Trans Graph 5:165:1–165:21Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kennedy L, Chang S-F (2008) Internet image archaeology: automatically tracing the manipulation history of photographs on the web. Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Multimedia 349–358Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Krawetz N (2007) A picture’s worth: Digital image analysis and forensics, Online article on: http://www.hackerfactor.com/papers/bh-usa-07-krawetz-wp.pdf (Accessed 20–03-2016).
  34. 34.
    Li CT, Li Y (2012) Color-decoupled photo response non-uniformity for digital image forensics. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst Video Technol 22:260–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Li W, Yuan Y, Yu N (2009) Passive detection of doctored JPEG image via block artifact grid extraction. Signal Process 89:1821–1829CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li J, L X, Yang B, Sun X (2015) Segmentation-based image copy-move forgery detection scheme. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 3:507–518Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lin Z, He J, Tang X, Tang CK (2009) Fast, automatic and fine-grained tampered JPEG image detection via DCT coefficient analysis. Pattern Recogn 42:2492–2501CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu Q, Cao X, Deng C, Guo X (2011) Identifying image composites through shadow matte consistency. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 6:1111–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Luo W, Qu Z, Huang J, Qiu G (2007) A novel method for detecting cropped and recompressed image block. International conference on Accoustics speech and. Signal Process 2:117–220Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lyu S, Pan X, Zhang X (2014) Exposing region splicing forgeries with blind local noise estimation. Int J Comput Vis 110:202–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mahdian B, Saic S (2009) Using noise inconsistencies for blind image forensics. Image Vis Comput 27:1497–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Muhammad G, Al-Hammadi MH, Hussain M, Bebis G (2014) Image forgery detection using steerable pyramid transform and local binary pattern. Mach Vis Appl 25:985–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pasquini C, Brunetta C, Vinci A, Conotter V, Boato G (2015) Towards the verification of image integrity in online news. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops (ICMEW) 1–6.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Patel H, Patel M (2015) An improvement of forgery video detection technique using Error Level Analysis. Int J Comput Appl. doi:10.5120/19615-1508 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Qureshi MA and Deriche M (2014) A review on copy move image forgery detection techniques 11th International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals & Devices (SSD) 1–5.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Redi J, Taktak W, Dugelay JL (2011) Digital image forensics: a booklet for beginners. Multimedia Tools and Applications 51:133–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    “Report on the IEEE-IFS challenge on image forensics”, (2013) http://www.signalprocessingsociety.org/news/581/607/Report-on-the-IEEE-IFS-challenge-on-image-forensics/ (Accessed 20–03-2016).
  48. 48.
    Ryu SJ, Kirchner M, Lee MJ, Lee HK (2013) Rotation invariant localization of duplicated image regions based on zernike moments. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 8:1355–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Stamm CM, Wu M, Ray Liu KJ (2013) Information forensics: an overview of the first decade. IEEE Access 1:167–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wang W, Jing D, Tieniu T (2011) Tampered region localization of digital color images based on JPEG compression noise. Digital Watermarking. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 120–133.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Xu G, Ye J, Shi YQ (2014) New developments in image tampering detection. Springer International Publishing, Digital Forensics and Watermarking, pp. 3–17Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ye S, Sun Q, Chang EC (2007) Detecting digital image forgeries by measuring inconsistencies of blocking artifact. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo 12–15.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yerushalmy I, Hel-Or H (2011) Digital image forgery detection based on lens and sensor aberration. Int J Comput Vis 92:71–91CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zampoglou M, Papadopoulos S, Kompatsiaris Y (2015) Detecting image splicing in the wild (web). IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops (ICMEW) 1–6.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zampoglou M, Papadopoulos S, Kompatsiaris Y, Bouwmeester R, Spangenberg J (2016) Web and social media image forensics for news professionals. Social Media in the Newsroom (#SMNews@ICWSM), Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media WorkshopsGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Zhao X, Li J, Li S, Wang S (2011) Detecting digital image splicing in chroma spaces. Digital Watermarking, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 12–22Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research and Technology HellasInformation Technologies InstituteThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations