1994-02-28 - Re: standard for stegonography?

Header Data

From: mgream@acacia.itd.uts.edu.au (Matthew Gream)
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Message Hash: 9a6f38c1e0e68e3027b4c88bf7be6177b74bb237b993475f9fe4e2f2034a340c
Message ID: <9402280550.AA18415@acacia.itd.uts.EDU.AU>
Reply To: <199402280131.RAA26338@netcom9.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-28 05:48:57 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 21:48:57 PST

Raw message

From: mgream@acacia.itd.uts.edu.au (Matthew Gream)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 21:48:57 PST
To: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: standard for stegonography?
In-Reply-To: <199402280131.RAA26338@netcom9.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9402280550.AA18415@acacia.itd.uts.EDU.AU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Earlier, Timothy C. May wrote:

> I'm sure this is the "standard" being talked about. (BTW, I agree that
> including trivially-readable messages like "***Begin Stego Block
> Now*** is a dumb idea....with reasonable standards for block size,
> e.g., the signal bits are the LSBs of the largest sub-block that's an
> even power of 1, no such headers are needed.)

How about something like small random pad, maybe one octet, then a
signature (such as "***Begin ...") with this header information being
encrypted via IDEA CFB. You could also include a more structured header
after this, ie. an ID for the software that created it, so the correct
demodulation technique can be applied, or at least warned about if not

With this type of method, unless you can pre-supply the key, the stego
header should look like noise.

Matthew Gream. ph: (02)-821-2043. M.Gream@uts.edu.au.
PGPMail and brown paperbags accepted. - Non Servatum -
  ''weirdo's make the world go around'' - A.Watts