Image Anonymization Detection with Deep Handcrafted Features

In recent years, the number of images shared online has continuously grown. The forensics community has kept the pace by developing techniques to both reliably extract information from these images, but also to remove it. In particular, the latest developments in image anonymization methods exposes an attack vector when used by skilled ill-intentioned image producers that may want to elude prosecution. We present an approach to detect whether or not an image has undergone a laundering process, i.e., it has been tampered with so that its unique characterizing features have been changed to avoid detection. We focus on the photo response non uniformity (PRNU) noise unique to every imaging sensor, and we consider that an image has been "laundered" when we detect the absence of PRNU from an image. We propose a per image preprocessing pipeline that generates information-rich features later used as input of fine-tuned convolutional neural networks (CNNs). We study the performance of the proposed approach using various CNN architectures and blind anonymization techniques and show its effectiveness under several training and testing scenarios. Our results also show that CNN models trained with the proposed feature are capable of generalizing over unseen devices and are robust against non-geometric transformations.

[1]  Mo Chen,et al.  Source digital camcorder identification using sensor photo response non-uniformity , 2007, Electronic Imaging.

[2]  Kannan Ramchandran,et al.  Low-complexity image denoising based on statistical modeling of wavelet coefficients , 1999, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[3]  Nasir D. Memon,et al.  Source camera identification based on CFA interpolation , 2005, IEEE International Conference on Image Processing 2005.

[4]  Jessica J. Fridrich,et al.  Camera identification from cropped and scaled images , 2008, Electronic Imaging.

[5]  Miroslav Goljan,et al.  Digital camera identification from sensor pattern noise , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[6]  Paolo Bestagini,et al.  Fooling PRNU-Based Detectors Through Convolutional Neural Networks , 2018, 2018 26th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO).

[7]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[8]  Rainer Böhme,et al.  The 'Dresden Image Database' for benchmarking digital image forensics , 2010, SAC '10.

[9]  Matthias Kirchner,et al.  Patch-Based Desynchronization of Digital Camera Sensor Fingerprints , 2016, Media Watermarking, Security, and Forensics.

[10]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Self-Organizing Neural Networks Integrating Domain Knowledge and Reinforcement Learning , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[11]  Jian Sun,et al.  Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[12]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[13]  Vincenzo Lipari,et al.  Inpainting-Based camera anonymization , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP).

[14]  Hyrum S. Anderson,et al.  The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigation , 2018, ArXiv.

[15]  P. Giannelli Daubert and Forensic Science: The Pitfalls of Law Enforcement Control of Scientific Research , 2010 .

[16]  Matthias Kirchner,et al.  Fast and reliable resampling detection by spectral analysis of fixed linear predictor residue , 2008, MM&Sec '08.

[17]  Sanjeev Kumar,et al.  Finding a Needle in Haystack: Facebook's Photo Storage , 2010, OSDI.

[18]  Nasir D. Memon,et al.  Analysis of Seam-Carving-Based Anonymization of Images Against PRNU Noise Pattern-Based Source Attribution , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[19]  Husrev T. Sencar,et al.  A study of the robustness of PRNU-based camera identification , 2009, Electronic Imaging.

[20]  Matthew C. Stamm,et al.  Adversarial Multimedia Forensics: Overview and Challenges Ahead , 2018, 2018 26th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO).

[21]  Paolo Bestagini,et al.  Forensic Camera Model Identification: Highlights from the IEEE Signal Processing Cup 2018 Student Competition [SP Competitions] , 2018, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[22]  Taghi M. Khoshgoftaar,et al.  A survey of transfer learning , 2016, Journal of Big Data.

[23]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition , 2014, ICLR.

[24]  Mo Chen,et al.  Effect of Compression on Sensor-Fingerprint Based Camera Identification , 2016, Media Watermarking, Security, and Forensics.

[25]  Saleem Alhabash,et al.  A Tale of Four Platforms: Motivations and Uses of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat Among College Students? , 2017 .

[26]  Min Wu,et al.  Information Forensics: An Overview of the First Decade , 2013, IEEE Access.

[27]  Pascal Vincent,et al.  Representation Learning: A Review and New Perspectives , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[28]  Mo Chen,et al.  Determining Image Origin and Integrity Using Sensor Noise , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[29]  Lei Zhang,et al.  Beyond a Gaussian Denoiser: Residual Learning of Deep CNN for Image Denoising , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.