Digital multimedia audio forensics: past, present and future

  • Mohammed Zakariah
  • Muhammad Khurram Khan
  • Hafiz Malik
Article

Abstract

Digital audio forensics is used for a variety of applications ranging from authenticating audio files to link an audio recording to the acquisition device (e.g., microphone), and also linking to the acoustic environment in which the audio recording was made, and identifying traces of coding or transcoding. This survey paper provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art (SOA) in digital audio forensics and highlights some open research problems and future challenges in this active area of research. The paper categorizes the audio file analysis into container and content-based analysis in order to detect the authenticity of the file. Existing SOA, in audio forensics, is discussed based on both container and content-based analysis. The importance of this research topic has encouraged many researchers to contribute in this area; yet, further scopes are available to help researchers and readers expand the body of knowledge. The ultimate goal of this paper is to introduce all information on audio forensics and encourage researchers to solve the unanswered questions. Our survey paper would contribute to this critical research area, which has addressed many serious cases in the past, and help solve many more cases in the future by using advanced techniques with more accurate results.

Keywords

Digital forensics Audio authentication Speech intelligibility Environment detection Microphone identification Transcoding detection 

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander A, Forth O, Tunstall D (2012) Music and noise fingerprinting and reference cancellation applied to forensic audio enhancement. In: Audio engineering society conference: 46th international conference: audio forensicsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balasubramaniyan VA, Poonawalla A, Ahamad M, Hunter MT, Traynor P (2010) PinDr0p: using single-ended audio features to determine call provenance. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on computer and communications security, pp 109–120Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bang KH, Park Y-C, Youn D-H (2006) A dual audio transcoding algorithm for digital multimedia broadcasting services. In: Audio Engineering Society Convention 120Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bianchi T, Rosa AD, Fontani M, Rocciolo G, Piva A (2014) Detection and localization of double compression in MP3 audio tracks. EURASIP J Inf Secur 2014:10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boll S (1979) Suppression of acoustic noise in speech using spectral subtraction. Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, IEEE Transactions on 27:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brixen EB (2007) Techniques for the authentication of digital audio recordings. In: Audio Engineering Society Convention 122Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buchholz R, Kraetzer C, Dittmann J (2009) Microphone classification using Fourier coefficients. In: Information hiding, pp 235–246Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaudhary UA, Malik H (2010) Automatic recording environment identification using acoustic features. In: Audio Engineering Society Convention 129Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen N, Xiao H-D, Wan W (2011) Audio hash function based on non-negative matrix factorisation of mel-frequency cepstral coefficients. Information Security, IET 5:19–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cuccovillo L, Mann S, Tagliasacchi M, Aichroth P (2013) Audio tampering detection via microphone classification. In: Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP), 2013 I.E. 15th International Workshop on, pp 177–182Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D’Alessandro B, Shi YQ (2009) MP3 bit rate quality detection through frequency spectrum analysis. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM workshop on multimedia and security, pp 57–62Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ding H, Havelock DI (2010) Drift-compensated adaptive filtering for improving speech intelligibility in cases with asynchronous inputs. EURASIP J Adv Signal Process 2010:12Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garcia-Romero D, Espy-Wilson CY (2010) Automatic acquisition device identification from speech recordings. In: Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2010 I.E. International Conference on, pp 1806–1809Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gerazov B, Kokolanski Z, Arsov G, Dimcev V (2012) Tracking of electrical network frequency for the purpose of forensic audio authentication. In: Optimization of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (OPTIM), 2012 13th International Conference on, 2012, pp 1164–1169Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grigoras C (2007) Applications of ENF criterion in forensic audio, video, computer and telecommunication analysis. Forensic Sci Int 167:136–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grigoras C (2009) Applications of ENF analysis in forensic authentication of digital audio and video recordings. J Audio Eng Soc 57:643–661Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grigoras C (2010) Statistical tools for multimedia forensics. In: Audio engineering society conference: 39th international conference: audio forensics: practices and challengesGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gupta S, Cho S, Kuo C-C (2012) Current developments and future trends in audio authentication. MultiMedia, IEEE 19:50–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hatje U, Musialik CM (2005) Frequency-domain processors for efficient removal of noise and unwanted audio events. In: Audio Engineering Society Conference: 26th International Conference: Audio Forensics in the Digital AgeGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hermansky H (1990) Perceptual linear predictive (PLP) analysis of speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 87:1738–1752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hicsonmez S, Sencar HT, Avcibas I (2011) Audio codec identification through payload sampling. In: Information Forensics and Security (WIFS), 2011 I.E. international workshop on, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Ikram S, Malik H (2010) Digital audio forensics using background noise. In: Multimedia and Expo (ICME), 2010 I.E. International Conference on, pp 106–110Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jenner F, Kwasinski A (2012) Highly accurate non-intrusive speech forensics for codec identifications from observed decoded signals. In: Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2012 I.E. international conference on, pp 1737–1740Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ju F-S, Fang C-M (2006) Time-frequency domain fast audio transcoding. In: Multimedia, 2006. ISM’06. Eighth IEEE international symposium on, pp 750–753Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koenig BE (1990) Authentication of forensic audio recordings. J Audio Eng Soc 38:3–33Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koenig BE, Lacey DS (2009) Forensic authentication of digital audio recordings. J Audio Eng Soc 57:662–695Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koenig BE, Lacey DS (2012) Forensic authenticity analyses of the header data in re-encoded WMA files from small Olympus audio recorders. J Audio Eng Soc 60:255–265Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Koenig BE, Lacey DS, Killion SA (2007) Forensic enhancement of digital audio recordings. J Audio Eng Soc 55:352–371Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Korycki R (2014a) Authenticity examination of compressed audio recordings using detection of multiple compression and encoders’ identification. Forensic Sci Int 238:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Korycki R (2014b) Detection of montage in lossy compressed digital audio recordings. Archives of Acoustics 39:65–72Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kraetzer C, Oermann A, Dittmann J, Lang A (2007) Digital audio forensics: a first practical evaluation on microphone and environment classification. In: Proceedings of the 9th workshop on Multimedia & security, pp 63–74Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    C. Kraetzer, K. Qian, M. Schott, and J. Dittmann (2011) A context model for microphone forensics and its application in evaluations. In: IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging, pp 78800P–78800P-15Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kurniawan F, Rahim MSM, Khalil MS, Khan MK (2016) Statistical-based audio forensic on identical microphones. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) 6:2211–2218Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lim JS, Oppenheim AV (1979) Enhancement and bandwidth compression of noisy speech. Proc IEEE 67:1586–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu Q, Sung AH, Qiao M (2010) Detection of double MP3 compression. Cogn Comput 2:291–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Luo D, Yang R, Huang J (2015) Identification of AMR decompressed audio. Digital Signal Processing 37:85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lv Z, Hu Y, Li C-T, Liu B-B (2013) Audio forensic authentication based on MOCC between ENF and reference signals. In: Signal and Information Processing (ChinaSIP), 2013 I.E. China Summit & International Conference on, pp 427–431Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Maher R (2009) Audio forensic examination. Signal Processing Magazine, IEEE 26:84–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Maher RC (2010) Overview of audio forensics. In: Intelligent multimedia analysis for security applications. Springer, vol. 282, pp. 127–144Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Malik H (2013) Acoustic environment identification and its applications to audio forensics. Information Forensics and Security, IEEE Transactions on 8:1827–1837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Malik H, Farid H (2010) Audio forensics from acoustic reverberation. In: Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2010 I.E. International Conference on, pp 1710–1713Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Malik H, Zhao H (2012) Recording environment identification using acoustic reverberation. In: Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2012 I.E. International Conference on, pp 1833–1836Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mansour MF (2009) Strategies for bit allocation reuse in audio transcoding. In: ICASSP, pp 157–160Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mansour MF (2012) A transcoding system for audio standards. IEEE transactions on multimedia 14:1381–1389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    McAulay R, Malpass M (1980) Speech enhancement using a soft-decision noise suppression filter. Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, IEEE Transactions on 28:137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Moon C-B, Kim H, Kim BM (2014) Audio recorder identification using reduced noise features. In: Ubiquitous information technologies and applications, Springer, pp 35–42Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Muhammad G, Alotaibi YA, Alsulaiman M, Huda MN (2010) Environment recognition using selected MPEG-7 audio features and Mel-Frequency Cepstral Coefficients. In: Digital Telecommunications (ICDT), 2010 Fifth International Conference on, pp 11–16Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Nikias CL (1993) Higher-order spectral analysis. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 1993. Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference of the IEEE. pp 319–319Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Olanrewaju R, Khalifa O (2012) Digital audio watermarking; techniques and applications, In: Computer and Communication Engineering (ICCCE), 2012 International Conference on,pp 830–835Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Owen T (1996) AES recommended practice for forensic purposes-managing recorded audio materials intended for examination. J Audio Eng Soc 44(4):275Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Paliwal K, Wójcicki K, Schwerin B (2010) Single-channel speech enhancement using spectral subtraction in the short-time modulation domain. Speech Comm 52:450–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Qiao M, Sung AH, Liu Q (2010) Revealing real quality of double compressed MP3 audio. In: Proceedings of the international conference on multimedia, pp 1011–1014Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Qiao M, Sung AH, Liu Q (2013) Improved detection of MP3 double compression using content-independent features. In: Signal Processing, Communication and Computing (ICSPCC), 2013 I.E. international conference on, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rabiner LR, Schafer RW (1978) Digital processing of speech signals, vol 100. Prentice-hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ratnam R, Jones DL, Wheeler BC, O’Brien WD Jr, Lansing CR, Feng AS (2003) Blind estimation of reverberation time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 114:2877–2892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rodríguez DPN, Apolinário JA, Biscainho LWP (2010) Audio authenticity: detecting ENF discontinuity with high precision phase analysis. Information Forensics and Security, IEEE Transactions on 5:534–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shanmugasundaram K, Kharrazi M, Memon N (2004) Nabs: a system for detecting resource abuses via characterization of flow content type. In: Computer security applications conference, 2004. 20th Annual, pp 316–325Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sharma D, Naylor PA, Gaubitch ND, Brookes M (2012) Non intrusive codec identification algorithm. In: Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2012 I.E. international conference on, pp 4477–4480Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Soulodre GA (2010) About this dereverberation business: A method for extracting reverberation from audio signals. In: Audio Engineering Society Convention 129Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Takagi K, Miyaji S, Sakazawa S, Takishima Y (2006) Conversion of MP3 to AAC in the compressed domain. In: Multimedia Signal Processing, 2006 I.E. 8th Workshop on, pp 132–135Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Tsoukalas DE, Mourjopoulos JN, Kokkinakis G (1997) Speech enhancement based on audible noise suppression. Speech and Audio Processing, IEEE Transactions on 5:497–514CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Weiss M, Aschkenasy E, Parsons T (1975) Study and development of the INTEL technique for improving speech intelligibility. DTIC DocumentGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Yang R, Qu Z, Huang J (2008) Detecting digital audio forgeries by checking frame offsets. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM workshop on multimedia and security, pp 21–26Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Yang R, Shi Y-Q, Huang J (2009) Defeating fake-quality MP3. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM workshop on multimedia and security, pp 117–124Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Yang R, Shi YQ, Huang J (2010) Detecting double compression of audio signal. In: IS&T/SPIE electronic imaging, pp 75410 K–75410 K-10Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Yang R, Qu Z, Huang J (2012) Exposing MP3 audio forgeries using frame offsets. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM) 8:35Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Yiu K-K, Mak M-W, Kung S-Y (2003) Environment adaptation for robust speaker verification. In: INTERSPEECHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zhang Y, Zhao Y (2013) Modulation domain blind speech separation in noisy environments. Speech Comm 55:1081–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Zhao H, Malik H (2012) Audio forensics using acoustic environment traces. In: Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP), 2012 IEEE, 2012, pp 373–376Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zhao H, Malik H (2013) Audio recording location identification using acoustic environment signature. Information Forensics and Security, IEEE Transactions on 8:1746–1759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Zhao H, Chen Y, Wang R, Malik H (2014) Audio source authentication and splicing detection using acoustic environmental signature. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on Information hiding and multimedia security, pp 159–164Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Zhou J, Garcia-Romero D, Espy-Wilson CY (2011) Automatic speech codec identification with applications to tampering detection of speech recordings. In proceedings of Interspeech, Florence, Italy, August, 2011, pp. 2533–2536Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammed Zakariah
    • 1
  • Muhammad Khurram Khan
    • 2
  • Hafiz Malik
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Computer and Information SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Center of Excellence in Information Assurance (CoEIA)King Saud UniversityRiyadhKingdom of Saudi Arabia
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Michigan-DearbornDearbornUSA

Personalised recommendations