Advertisement

Detection of Copy-Scale-Move Forgery in Digital Images Using SFOP and MROGH

  • Mahmoud Emam
  • Qi Han
  • Hongli Zhang
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 623)

Abstract

Social network platforms such as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook are one of the fastest and most convenient means for sharing digital images. Digital images are generally accepted as credible news but, it may undergo some manipulations before being shared without leaving any obvious traces of tampering; due to existence of the powerful image editing softwares. Copy-move forgery technique is a very simple and common type of image forgery, where a part of the image is copied and then pasted in the same image to replicate or hide some parts from the image. In this paper, we proposed a copy-scale-move forgery detection method based on Scale Invariant Feature Operator (SFOP) detector. The keypoints are then described using MROGH descriptor. Experimental results show that the proposed method is able to locate and detect the forgery even if under some geometric transformations such as scaling.

Keywords

Image forensics Copy-move Forgery detection Scale invariant feature RANSAC MROGH descriptor 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank all anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. Additionally, This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number: 61471141, 61301099, 61361166006), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant Number: HIT. KISTP. 201416, HIT. KISTP. 201414).

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Qershi, O.M., Khoo, B.E.: Passive detection of copy-move forgery in digital images: state-of-the-art. Forensic Sci. Int. 231(1), 284–295 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amerini, I., Ballan, L., Caldelli, R., Del Bimbo, A., Serra, G.: A SIFT-based forensic method for copy-move attack detection and transformation recovery. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 6(3), 1099–1110 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bay, H., Ess, A., Tuytelaars, T., Van Gool, L.: Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF). Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 110(3), 346–359 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bigu, J., et al.: A structure feature for some image processing applications based on spiral functions. Computer Vis. Graph. Image Process. 51(2), 166–194 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bo, X., Junwen, W., Guangjie, L., Yuewei, D.: Image copy-move forgery detection based on surf. In: 2010 International Conference on Multimedia Information Networking and Security (MINES), pp. 889–892. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Christlein, V., Riess, C., Jordan, J., Riess, C., Angelopoulou, E.: An evaluation of popular copy-move forgery detection approaches. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 7(6), 1841–1854 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehsan, S., Kanwal, N., Clark, A.F., McDonald-Maier, K.D.: Measuring the coverage of interest point detectors. In: Kamel, M., Campilho, A. (eds.) ICIAR 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6753, pp. 253–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fan, B., Wu, F., Hu, Z.: Aggregating gradient distributions into intensity orders: a novel local image descriptor. In: 2011 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2377–2384. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fischler, M.A., Bolles, R.C.: Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun. ACM 24(6), 381–395 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Förstner, W.: A framework for low level feature extraction. In: Eklundh, J.-O. (ed.) Computer Vision—ECCV 1994. LNCS, vol. 801, pp. 383–394. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Förstner, W., Dickscheid, T., Schindler, F.: Detecting interpretable and accurate scale-invariant keypoints. In: 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 2256–2263. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang, H., Guo, W., Zhang, Y.: Detection of copy-move forgery in digital images using sift algorithm. In: 2008 Pacific-Asia Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Industrial Application, PACIIA 2008, vol. 2, pp. 272–276. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lowe, D.G.: Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 60(2), 91–110 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nathalie Diane, W.N., Xingming, S., Moise, F.K.: A survey of partition-based techniques for copy-move forgery detection. Sci. World J. 2014, 13 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pan, X., Lyu, S.: Detecting image region duplication using sift features. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp. 1706–1709. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Powers, D.M.: Evaluation: from precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and TechnologyHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics, Faculty of ScienceMenoufia UniversityShebin El-koomEgypt

Personalised recommendations