4.7 Article

A Common Method of Share Authentication in Image Secret Sharing

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TCSVT.2020.3025527

关键词

Image secret sharing; lossless recovery; share authentication; no pixel expansion

资金

  1. Key Program of the National University of Defense Technology [ZK-17-02-07]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61602491]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an ISS scheme with separate share authentication abilities of both dealer participatory authentication and dealer nonparticipatory authentication for a (k, n)-threshold. The advantages of polynomial-based ISS and visual secret sharing are skillfully fused in the design, achieving low decryption complexity, lossless decryption and no pixel expansion. Experiments and theoretical analyses demonstrate the effectiveness of the designed scheme.
Because of the importance of digital images and their extensive application to digital watermarking, block chain, access control, identity authentication, distributive storage in the cloud and so on, image secret sharing (ISS) is attracting ever-increasing attention. Share authentication is an important issue in its practical application. However, most ISS schemes with share authentication ability require a dealer to participate in the authentication (namely, dealer participatory authentication). In this paper, we design an ISS for a (k, n)-threshold with separate share authentication abilities of both dealer participatory authentication and dealer nonparticipatory authentication. The advantages of polynomial-based ISS and visual secret sharing (VSS) are skillfully fused to achieve these two authentication abilities without sending a share by using a screening operation. In addition, the designed scheme has the characteristics of low decryption (authentication) complexity, lossless decryption and no pixel expansion. Experiments and theoretical analyses are performed to show the effectiveness of the designed scheme.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据