Maybe no stego on eBay afterall

[jamesd at echeque.com]

    --
On 19 Jul 2002 at 21:01, Peter Wayner wrote:

>
> I used to think that CCD cameras were a pretty good
> approximation of random number generators, but not any longer.
> I've seen too many pictures where the LSB is heavily correlated
> with some of the higher order bits. Really. There are some good
> pictures documenting in my book. So while I think you're making
> a fair point, experience doesn't always suggest that it work out
> that way.

Different cameras will have different distributions, different
images and lighting conditions will have different distributions.
Different post processing with graphics programs will modify those
distributions in different ways.

This makes it harder, not easier, for the stego detect program to
detect a deviation from normal statistics, since it is hard to say
what "normal" is. 

    --digsig
         James A. Donald
     6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
     eXeg6P7MbUxKZ1HzUEQgF4qbXq7Lws3dgbRD7+d7
     28RoYEBvxlq3xf2ovqwJdZ9f1miIoIU5Aef2rW4i6


---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com