2017
DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.13658
| View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Nowadays, surveillance systems are used to control crimes. Therefore, the authenticity of digital video increases the accuracy of deciding to admit the digital video as legal evidence or not. Inter-frame duplication forgery is the most common type of video forgery methods. However, many existing methods have been proposed for detecting this type of forgery and these methods require high computational time and impractical. In this study, we propose an efficient inter-frame duplication detection algorithm based … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
(50 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As most of the public data sets available are meant for intra-frame regional forgery, we simulated an inter-frame forged data set from publicly available videos. The frame-level forgery was generated by inserting/deleting/duplicating a random sequence of frames as [12][13][14][15][16][17][18] did. The original videos used for tampering creation were mostly taken from a public data set DERF (https://media.xiph.org/ video/derf/) and some of them from YouTube.…”
Section: Data Setmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As most of the public data sets available are meant for intra-frame regional forgery, we simulated an inter-frame forged data set from publicly available videos. The frame-level forgery was generated by inserting/deleting/duplicating a random sequence of frames as [12][13][14][15][16][17][18] did. The original videos used for tampering creation were mostly taken from a public data set DERF (https://media.xiph.org/ video/derf/) and some of them from YouTube.…”
Section: Data Setmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent studies have indicated that detecting the frame duplication attack in a static scene is difficult by comparing the objects in replayed motion. 20 The difficulty is partly due to the noise interference of the camera over its video output, as well as the changes in the light intensity caused by indoor lighting or natural ambient light. To exploit the limitations of existing detection techniques and human perception of live video streams, in our attack, the compromised surveillance camera retains a recently recorded static scene for masking live stream whenever triggered.…”
Section: Video-audio Replay Attackmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These algorithms mostly extract features from a video sub-sequence and compare them with other sub-sequences for similarity [16]. A number of correlation techniques [6,17,18] have also been adopted to identify frame duplication and region duplication in a video. All these similarity detection techniques require a stored surveillance recording database, and hence they require much computation time to process each video frame.…”
Section: Background Knowledge and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, we opted to deploy the attack once a static scene appeared again instead of immediately launching the attack. Deploying the attack with static scene avoids suspicious artifacts like the sudden disappearance of a person from frame, and detecting duplicated frames in a static scene is harder than frames with objects in motion [18]. In Figure 6b, the periodic changes in the environment is reflected in the replay recording.…”
Section: Real-time Frame Duplication Attack Implementationmentioning
confidence: 99%