Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 98, Issue 4, pp 3039–3057 | Cite as

Non-intrusive Forensic Detection Method Using DSWT with Reduced Feature Set for Copy-Move Image Tampering

  • V. Thirunavukkarasu
  • J. Satheesh Kumar
  • Gyoo Soo Chae
  • J. Kishorkumar


The key intention of non-intrusive image forensic detection is to resolve whether an image is original or tampered. In contrast to intrusive methods, there is no supporting pattern that has been embedded into an image to ensure image authenticity. The only accessible cue is the original characteristics of an image. Various non-intrusive techniques have been proposed to ensure image authenticity but no adequate solution exists so far. This article introduced a robust technique by means of Discrete Stationary Wavelet Transform along with Multi Dimension Scaling to detect familiar category of copy-move image tampering. Experimental outcomes shows that proposed technique decreases computational complexity by reducing feature dimension and locate the tampered region more accurately even when the tampered image is blurred, brightness altered, colour reduced and pasted in multiple locations. Overall tamper detection accuracy is greater than 97% and false positive rate close to zero, which indicates that proposed technique will discover tampered region more precisely compared with existing methods.


Intrusive DSWT MDS Copy-move Tampering Blurring 



Authors are thankful to the University Grants Commission (UGC) for the support of Innovative project scheme.


  1. 1.
    Mahdian, B., & Saic, S. (2010). A bibliography on blind methods for identifying image forgery. Signal Processing and Image Communication, 25(6), 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Satheeshkumar, J., & Thirunavukkarasu, V. (2014). Passive tamper detection techniques in digital images-A survey. NCDS, pp. 237–244.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thirunavukkarsu, V., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2014). Analysis of digital image forgery detection techniques. International Conference on Convergence Technology, 4(1), 1000–1002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thirunavukkarsu, V., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2014). Intrusive and non-intrusive techniques for detecting fake images. IJBI, 3(1), 374–379.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Farid, H. (2009). A survey of image forgery detection. IEEE Signal Processing, 2(26), 6–25.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thirunavukkarsu, V., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2014). Analysis of various noise models and filtering techniques used for image restoration. IJRCSIT, 3(1), 4–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Satheesh Kumar, J., & Thirunavukkarsu, V. (2015). Image splicing detection based on camera characteristics and lighting inconsistencies. ICIoTC, 1(1), 10–14.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Al-Qershi, O. M., & Khoo, B. E. (2013). Passive detection of copy-move forgery in digital images: State-of-the-art. Forensic Science International, 231, 284–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thirunavukkarsu, V., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2014). Evolution of blind methods for image tamper detection-A review. IJAER, 9(21), 5069–5076.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thirunavukkarsu, V., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2016). A novel method to detect copy-move tampering in digital images. IND-JST, 9(8), 1–4.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fridrich, A. J., Soukalm, B. D., Lukas, A, J. (2003). Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images. Proceedings of Digital Forensic Research Workshop, pp. 19–23.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Popescu, A. C., & Farid, H. (2005). Exposing digital forgeries in color fil-ter array interpolated images. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 53(10), 3948–3959.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mehdi G., Mohammad F., Ahmad F. (2011). DWT-DCT (QCD) based copy-move image forgery detection. IWSSIP, 1–4.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhao, J., & Guo, J. (2013). Passive forgeries for copy-move image forgery using a method based on DCT and SVD. Forensic Science International, 233(1), 158–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bravo-Solorio, S. Nandi, A. K., (2009). Passive forensic method for detecting duplicated regions affected by reflection, rotation and scaling. EUSIPCO, pp. 824–828.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cao, Y., Gao, T., Fan, L., & Yang, Q. (2012). A robust detection algorithm for copy-move forgery in digital images. Forensic Science International, 214(1), 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chang, C., Cloud, Y., & Chang, C.-C. (2013). A forgery detection algorithm for exemplar-based in-painting images using multi-region relation. Image and Vision Computing, 31(1), 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, L., Li, S., Zhu, H., & Xiaoyue, W. (2014). Detecting copy-move forgery under affine transforms for image forensics. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 40(6), 1951–1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guohui L., Qiong W., Dan T., Shaojie S., (2007). A sorted neighbourhood approach for detecting duplicated regions in image forgeries based on dwt and svd. IEEE International conference on multimedia and expo, pp. 1750–1753.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang, B., Sun, X., Chen, X., Zhang, J., & Li, X. (2013). An efficient forensic method for copy–move forgery detection based on DWT-FWHT. Radio Engineering, 22(4), 1098–1105.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee, J.-C. (2015). Copy-move image forgery detection based on Gabor magnitude. Journal of visual communication image representation, 31, 320–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bashar, M., Noda, K., Ohnishi, N., & Mori, K. (2010). Exploring duplicated regions in natural images. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 9(9), 1–40.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burges, C. J. C. (2009). Dimension reduction: A guided tour. Foundations and TrendsR in Machine Learning, 2(4), 275–365.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kodak Lossless True Color Image Suite [Internet]. [Cited 2016 Apr 27].
  25. 25.
    Tralic, D., Zupancic, I., Grgic, S., Grgic, M., (2013). CoMoFoD—New database for copy-move forgery detection. In Proceedings of 55th International Smposium ELMAR, pp. 49–54.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee, J.-C., Chang, C.-P., & Chen, W.-K. (2015). Detection of copy–move image forgery using histogram of orientated gradients. Information Sciences, 321, 250–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Surya Prabha, D., & Satheesh Kumar, J. (2015). Assessment of banana fruit maturity by image processing technique. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 52(3), 1316–1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Thirunavukkarasu
    • 1
  • J. Satheesh Kumar
    • 1
  • Gyoo Soo Chae
    • 2
  • J. Kishorkumar
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer Applications, School of Computer Science and EngineeringBharathiar UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Division of Information and CommunicationBaekseok UniversityCheonanSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsArignar Anna Government Arts CollegeCheyyarIndia

Personalised recommendations