Advertisement

Copy-Move Forgery Detection Based on Discrete and SURF Transforms

  • Faten Maher Al_azrak
  • Zeinab F. Elsharkawy
  • Ahmed S. Elkorany
  • Ghada M. El Banby
  • Moawad I. Dessowky
  • Fathi E. Abd El-SamieEmail author
Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

As a result of the rapid progress in editing techniques, fakes and forgeries in images became easy and pervasive. Image forgery detection methods have been implemented to reveal the image rig. Copy-move forgery is a type of forgery in which a part of the image is copied to another location of the same image to hide important information or duplicate certain objects in the original image, which makes the viewer suffer from difficulties to detect the tampered region. In this type of image forgery, it is easy to perform forgery, but more difficult to detect it, because the features on the copied parts are similar to those of other parts of the image. This paper presents two approaches for forgery detection: one based on discrete transforms and the other based on Speeded-UP Robust Feature (SURF) transform. In the first framework, a comparison is presented between different trigonometric transforms in 1D and 2D for the objective of forgery detection. This comparison study is based on the completeness rate and the time of processing for the detection. This comparison gives a conclusion that the DFT in 1D or 2D implementation is the best choice to detect copy-move forgery compared to other trigonometric transforms. For the SURF-based framework, the image is divided into blocks with 50% overlapping. SURF features are extracted for each block and the complementary image to this block. A matching process is performed on the SURF keypoints of the block and the complementary image. The number of matched keypoints between each block of interest and its complementary image is recorded. The whole image is treated on a block-by-block basis yielding 49 matching scores in a distinctive feature vector. The correlation matrix for this feature vector is created and decomposed with Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) to give singular values used to classify the whole image as being tampered or not. Different types of classifiers have been used and compared. Accuracy levels up to 100% have been recorded.

Keywords

Image forgery detection Trigonometric transforms Copy-move forgery SURF SVD 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Farid, H. (2009). Photo fakery and forensics. Advances in Computers,77, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baron, C. (2008). Adobe photoshop forensics: Sleuths, truths, and fauxtography. Boston: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birajdar, G. K., & Mankar, V. H. (2013). Digital image forgery detection using passive techniques: A survey. Digital Investigation,10(3), 226–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thajeel, S. A., & Ghazali, S. (2014). A survey of copy-move forgery detection techniques. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 70(1), 25–35.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, Yi, et al. (2018). Sensorineural hearing loss detection via discrete wavelet transform and principal component analysis combined with generalized eigenvalue proximal support vector machine and Tikhonov regularization. Multimedia Tools and Applications,77(3), 3775–3793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jwaid, M. F., & Baraskar, T. N. (2017). Study and analysis of copy-move and splicing image forgery detection techniques. In 2017 international conference on I-SMAC (IoT in social, mobile, analytics and cloud) (I-SMAC). IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guo, Y., et al. (2018). Fake colorized image detection. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security,13(8), 1932–1944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elsharkawy, Z. F., Abdelwahab, S. A. S., Abd El-Samie, F. E., et al. (2019). New and efficient blind detection algorithm for digital image forgery using homomorphic image processing. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 78, 21585–21611.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-019-7206-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warif, N. B. A., Choo, K. K. R., Wahab, A. W. A., Shamshirband, S., Ramli, R., Salleh, R., et al. (2016). Copy-move forgery detection: Survey, challenges and future directions. Journal of Network and Computer Applications,75, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fridrich, A. J., Lukáš, A. J., & Soukal, B. D. (2003). Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images. In Proceedings of digital forensic research workshop.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farid, H., & Popescu, A. (2004). Exposing digital forgeries by detecting duplicated image regions. Department Computer Science, Dartmouth College, Technology Report TR2004-515 ed.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, G., Wu, Q., Sun, S., & Tu, D. (2007) A sorted neighborhood approach for detecting duplicated regions in image forgeries based on DWT and SVD. In 2007 IEEE international conference on multimedia and expo (pp. 1750–1753).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mahdian, B., & Saic, S. (2007). Detection of copy-move forgery using a method based on blur moment invariants. Forensic Science International,171, 180–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lynch, G., Liao, H.-Y. M., & Shih, F. Y. (2013). An efficient expanding block algorithm for image copy-move forgery detection. Information Sciences,239, 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amerini, I., Serra, G., Del Bimbo, A., Caldelli, R., & Ballan, L. (2011). A sift-based forensic method for copy-move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security,6, 1099–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jaberi, M., Muhammad, G., Hussain, M., & Bebis, G. (2014). Accurate and robust localization of duplicated region in copy-move image forgery. Machine Vision and Applications,25, 451–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li, L., Wu, X., Zhu, H., & Li, S. (2014). Detecting copy-move forgery under affine transforms for image forensics. Computers & Electrical Engineering,40, 1951–1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zandi, M., Mansouri, A., & Mahmoudi-Aznaveh, A. (2014). Adaptive matching for copy-move forgery detection. In 2014 IEEE international workshop on information forensics and security (WIFS) (pp. 119–124).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hashmi, M. F., Hambarde, A. R., & Keskar, A. G. (2013). Copy move forgery detection using DWT and SIFT features. In 2013 13th international conference on intellient systems design and applications. IEEE.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hashmi, M. F., Anand, V., & Keskar, A. G. (2014). A copy-move image forgery detection based on speeded up robust feature transform and Wavelet Transforms. In 2014 international conference on computer and communication technology (ICCCT). IEEE.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cao, Y., Yang, Q., Fan, L., & Gao, T. (2012). A robust detection algorithm for copy-move forgery in digital images. Forensic Science International,214, 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Winograd, S. (1978). On computing the discrete Fourier transform. Mathematics of Computation,34, 175–199.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hafed, Z. M., & Levine, M. D. (2001). Face recognition using the discrete cosine transform. International Journal of Computer Vision,43, 167–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Acharya, T., & Chakrabarti, C. (2006). A survey on lifting-based discrete wavelet transform architectures. Journal of VLSI Signal Processing Systems for Signal, Image and Video Technology,42, 321–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Amolins, K., Dare, P., & Zhang, Y. (2007). Wavelet based image fusion techniques—An introduction, review and comparison. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing,62, 249–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fridrich, A., et al. (2003). Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Huang, Y., Long, D., Sun, W., & Lu, W. (2011). Improved DCT-based detection of copy-move forgery in images. Forensic Science International,206, 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Popescu, A., & Farid, H. (2004). Exposing digital forgeries by detecting duplicated image regions. Department of Computer Science, Technical Report TR2004-515.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dang-Nguyen, D. T., Boato, G., Conotter, V., & Pasquini, C. (2015). RAISE: A raw images dataset for digital image forensics. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM multimedia systems conference (pp. 219–224).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Harris, C., & Stephens, M. (1988). A combined corner and edge detector. In Proceedings of the Alvey vision conference (pp. 147–151).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bay, H., Ess, A., Tuytelaars, T., & Van Gool, L. (2011). Speeded-up robust features (SURF). Computer Vision and Image Understanding,110, 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pedersen, J. T. (2011). Study group SURF: Feature detection and description. Department of Computer Science, Aarhus University, Q4-2011.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Muthugnanambika, M., & Padmavathi, S. (2017). Feature detection for color images using SURF. In International conference on advanced computing and communication systems, IEEE.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gul, G., & Kurugollu, F. (2010). SVD-based universal spatial domain image steganalysis. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security,5(2), 349–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faten Maher Al_azrak
    • 1
  • Zeinab F. Elsharkawy
    • 2
  • Ahmed S. Elkorany
    • 1
  • Ghada M. El Banby
    • 3
  • Moawad I. Dessowky
    • 1
  • Fathi E. Abd El-Samie
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Electrical Communications, Faculty of Electronic EngineeringMenoufia UniversityMenoufEgypt
  2. 2.Engineering Department, Nuclear Research CenterAtomic Energy AuthorityCairoEgypt
  3. 3.Department of Industrial Electronics and Control Engineering, Faculty of Electronic EngineeringMenoufia UniversityMenoufEgypt

Personalised recommendations