On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:45:28 -0600 Mark Allums <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Celejar wrote: > > Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> There are even tools such as steghide for those who want to do things > >> as useless as hiding information inside an image. > > > > I'm curious; why is that necessarily useless? I now that many > > steganography methods are broken, in the sense that there are methods to > > detect their use and possibly even recover the hidden information, but > > why is the concept inherently useless? > > Not totally or inherently useless, but not very practical. You would > still need encryption as well as information hiding, so the only use for > it is to try and hide the fact that you are hiding something. That is > very hard to do. You may thank your friendly neighborhood statistician > for that. I am aware that encryption is still required; steganography will commonly be used in concert with encryption. As to the feasibility of detecting steganography, there is a fair amount of work on the subject, e.g.: http://www.jjtc.com/Steganalysis/ http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1684 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography http://www.guillermito2.net/stegano/ And see the references in the Wikipedia article. > Mark Allums Celejar -- mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
