Comparison of Matching Methods for Copy-Move Image Forgery Detection
Copy-Move is one of the most common image forgery types, where a region of an image is copied and pasted into another location of the same image. Such a forgery is simple to achieve but hard to be detected as the pasted region shares the same characteristics with the image. Although plenty of algorithms have been proposed to tackle the copy-move detection problem, those algorithms differ in two things; matching method and type of features. In this paper, we focus on analyzing and comparing four matching methods in terms of accuracy and robustness against different image processing operations. Such analysis and comparison provide indispensable information for the design of new accurate and reliable copy-move detection techniques.
KeywordsCopy-move Digital image forensics Image forgery
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance provided by Ministry of Education Malaysia through FRGS grant number 203/PELECT/6071305.
- 1.Mahdian B, Saic S (2010) A bibliography on blind methods for identifying image forgery. Signal Process: Image Commun 25:389–399Google Scholar
- 7.Al-Qershi OM, Khoo BE (2014) Enhanced matching method for copy-move forgery detection by means of zernike moments. In: Digital-forensics and watermarking. Springer, pp 485–497Google Scholar
- 10.Shivakumar B, Baboo LDSS (2011) Detection of region duplication forgery in digital images using surf. IJCSI Int J Comput Sci Issues 8Google Scholar
- 11.Langille A, Gong M (2006) An efficient match-based duplication detection algorithm. In: The 3rd Canadian conference on computer and robot vision, 2006. IEEE, pp 64–64Google Scholar
- 12.Indyk P, Motwani R (1998) Approximate nearest neighbors: towards removing the curse of dimensionality. In: Proceedings of the thirtieth annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, ACM, pp 604–613Google Scholar
- 15.Ryu SJ, Lee MJ, Lee HK (2010) Detection of copy-rotate-move forgery using zernike moments. In: Information hiding. Springer, pp 51–65Google Scholar