Bit-Level Triangular Content-Aware Permutation for Fragile Image Watermarking: Zero False Positive Rate, Single-Bit Sensitivity, and Arbitrary Dimension Support
Organizations: Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran · School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Iran University of Science and Technology, Narmak, Tehran, 1684613114, Iran
Abstract
With the growth of digital document exchange, protecting image integrity against attacks such as Vector Quantization (VQ) and collage has become critical. Existing methods are vulnerable to these attacks and limited to fixed image dimensions. This paper presents a novel, dimension-agnostic, fragile watermarking algorithm that enhances security and tamper localization by replacing conventional hash functions with Triangular Content-Aware Permutation (TCA). The image is combined with key-based global noise and divided into blocks. The core innovation is applying content-dependent permutation with intrinsic avalanche effect (TCA) at the bit-plane level, generating a unique content-dependent watermark. For color images, a vertical sandwich transformation merges channels, preserving inter-channel dependency with only 1.62x time increase. The "remainder merging" strategy eliminates padding constraints. Experiments on 50 grayscale and 10 color images under 18 attacks show FPR=0% and FNR=0% for 17 attacks. Salt-and-pepper noise yields negligible FNR of 0.27% (grayscale) and 0.14% (color). Average PSNR is 51.14 dB (8-bit), 75.25 dB (12-bit), and 99.33 dB (16-bit). Embedding and extraction times are 1.61 s and 1.63 s, respectively. The algorithm achieves 100% accuracy against collage, VQ, copy-move, JPEG (quality 5-95), and geometric attacks, providing a secure solution for digital forensics, medical imaging, and legal document authentication.
Figures & tables
| Paper | Security Key | Localization | Block Size | Color Space & Depth | Rounding | Padding |
| Bouarroudj 2024 (High Cap.) [ 20 ] | ✓ | X | (Fixed) | Grayscale (8,12,16) | X (DFT) | X |
| Adi 2025 [ 9 ] | X | ✓ | Variable (Power-of-2) | Grayscale (8) | ✓(Spatial) | X |
| Wu 2026 [ 14 ] | ✓ | ✓ | / (Fixed) | Grayscale (8) | ✓(Spatial) | X |
| Sisaudia 2024 [ 23 ] | X | ✓ | (Fixed) | Grayscale (8) | ✓(Spatial) | X |
| Akhtarkavan 2023 [ 18 ] | X | X | (Fixed) | Grayscale (16) | ✓(IIDWT) | X |
| Bouarroudj 2025 [ 7 ] | ✓ | ✓ | (Fixed) | Gray/Color (8,12,16) | X (DFT+DWT) | X |
| Layer | Mechanism | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Noise masking | XOR with seed-driven noise | Spatial location binding |
| CTR-style keying | Multiplication by | Block order binding |
| TCA scrambling | Content-dependent permutation | Avalanche effect + non-analytic behavior |
| Center selection | Fixed offset from corners | Avoid boundary artifacts |
| Advantage | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Zero change to core algorithm | All functions including block partitioning, TCA scrambling, and bitwise operations work without any modification. |
| Preserves inter-channel dependency | Unlike methods that process each color channel independently [ 25 , 8 , 27 , 7 , 14 ] , the proposed approach maintains dependency between channels. A manipulation in one channel (e.g., only the red channel) changes the watermark of the entire block. |
| Uniform security parameters | The secret seed, key , and number of TCA iterations are the same for all three channels. |
| Favorable time efficiency | The number of blocks remains constant and only the block height increases. Consequently, execution time increases by about 1.7 times (not 3 times). In contrast, if the three color channels were processed independently, the number of blocks would triple and execution time would approximately triple as well. |
| Attack | TPR (%) | FPR (%) | FNR (%) | ACC (%) | Precision | F1 |
| Gaussian Noise | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Poisson Noise | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Speckle Noise | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Brightness Adjustment | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Contrast Adjustment | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Median Filtering | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 1 |
| Attack | Parameters | TPR (%) | FPR (%) | FNR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gaussian Noise | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| Poisson Noise | - | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Speckle Noise | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| Brightness Adjustment | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| Contrast Adjustment | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| Median Filtering | kernel | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Density ( ) | TPR (%) | FPR (%) | FNR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0001 | |||
| 0.0005 | |||
| 0.001 | |||
| 0.005 | |||
| 0.01 | |||
| 0.02 |
| Bit-Depth | Attack | TPR (%) | FPR (%) | FNR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-bit | Single-Bit Change | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| 12-bit | Salt-and-Pepper Noise (0.05) | 99.97 | 0 | 0.03 |
| 16-bit | Single-Bit Change | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| 16-bit | Salt-and-Pepper Noise (0.05) | 100 | 0 | 0 |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Image Dimensions | |
| Block Size | |
| Number of Blocks | 22272 |
| PSNR (dB) | 51.15 |
| Embedding Time (avg. 5 runs) | 5.78 s |
| Extraction Time (avg. 5 runs) | 5.47 s |
| Block Size | Number of Blocks | Duplicate Watermarks (Pairs) | Embedding Time (s) | Extraction Time (s) | PSNR (dB) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28,900 | 798,842 | 5.91 | 7.40 | 51.14 | |
| 16,384 | 2,076 | 3.69 | 3.50 | 51.13 | |
| 10,404 | 1 | 2.44 | 2.38 | 51.13 | |
| 7,225 | 0 | 1.61 | 1.63 | 51.14 | |
| 4,096 | 0 | 1.19 | 1.18 | 51.15 | |
| 1,024 | 0 | 0.71 | 0.84 | 51.14 |
Image Forgery Detection
Image Forgery Detection studies how to identify manipulated or synthetic images and locate the visual evidence of tampering.
See all 126 papers