Figure 1.
Schematic block diagram of the proposed portable QRNG device for ECC processor.
Table 1.
Mapping the ciphertext point with DNA nucleotide.
| 0-CCA | 1-GTT | 2-TTG | 3-GGT | 4-TTT | 5-TCG | 6-CGC | 7-ATG | 8-AGT | 9-CGA |
Figure 2.
Hybrid video steganography method—Transmitter side.
Figure 3.
Key frame selection.
Figure 4.
2-level DWT compression technique.
Figure 5.
Hybrid video steganography method—Receiver side.
Figure 6.
Key frames.
Figure 7.
Selected key frame.
Figure 8.
First-level DWT techniques.
Figure 9.
Second-level DWT techniques.
Figure 10.
Resultant 2-level DWT compression techniques.
Table 3.
Elliptic curve points for E : y2 mod 43 = (x3 + x + 1) mod 43.
| (2, 21) | (2, 22) | (3, 17) | (3, 26) |
| (11, 15) | (11, 28) | (12, 8) | (12, 35) |
| (20, 18) | (20, 25) | (21, 9) | (21, 34) |
| (26, 4) | (26, 39) | (27, 19) | (27, 24) |
| (29, 9) | (29, 34) | (31, 14) | (31, 29) |
| (32,11) | (32, 32) | (33, 18) | (33, 25) |
| (35, 13) | (35, 30) | (36, 9) | (36, 34) |
| (38, 43) | (40, 10) | (40, 33) | (43, 1) |
| (43,42) |
Table 4.
Comparison of embedding capacity.
| S. No | Cover Video | LSB-Based Steganography Method | Proposed Steganography Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Test Video 1 | 12034 | 28732 |
| 2 | Test Video 2 | 74543 | 80223 |
| 3 | Test Video 3 | 84543 | 104532 |
| 4 | Test Video 4 | 90453 | 123453 |
Figure 11.
Comparison of mean square error.
Table 5.
Comparison of MSE values.
| S. No | Test Video | LSB-Based Steganography Method | Proposed Hybrid Video Steganography Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Test Video 1 | 0.04657 | 0.03456 |
| 2 | Test Video 2 | 0.04456 | 0.030345 |
| 3 | Test Video 3 | 0.04103 | 0.029023 |
| 4 | Test Video 4 | 0.03998 | 0.028989 |
Table 6.
Comparison of peak signal to noise ratio (PSNR in dB).
| S. No | Cover Video | LSB-Based Steganography Method | Proposed Hybrid Video Steganography Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Test Video 1 | 45.34 | 59.76 |
| 2 | Test Video 2 | 48.74 | 55.78 |
| 3 | Test Video 3 | 49.23 | 60.15 |
| 4 | Test Video 4 | 40.98 | 66.97 |
Table 7.
Time taken for processing the operation.
| S. No. | Operation | Processing Time (ms) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | ECC Encryption | 590 |
| 2. | ECC Decryption | 452 |
| 3. | DNA Mapping | 55 |
| 4. | Binary Mapping | 45 |
| 5. | SVD Embedding | 144 |
| 6. | DWT Compression | 159 |
Table 8.
Quantitative comparison across payloads.
| Method | Payload (approx. bpp) | PSNR (dB) mean | PSNR (dB) std | NC mean | NC std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposed (AI DWT-SVD QIM) | 0.1 | 59.19644696 | 0.914029476 | 0.7 | 0.06 |
| Baseline (Fixed DWT-SVD) | 0.1 | 65.61027698 | 0.904630807 | 0.79 | 0.05 |
| Baseline (Spatial LSB) | 0.1 | 57.75045256 | 0.153452569 | 1 | 0 |
| Proposed (AI DWT-SVD QIM) | 0.2 | 59.71848255 | 1.088280969 | 0.70 | 0.08 |
| Baseline (Fixed DWT-SVD) | 0.2 | 65.75551768 | 0.859072287 | 0.75 | 0.10 |
| Baseline (Spatial LSB) | 0.2 | 56.8748167 | 0.12409714 | 1 | 0 |
| Proposed (AI DWT-SVD QIM) | 0.3 | 58.94400964 | 0.566933712 | 0.66 | 0.06 |
| Baseline (Fixed DWT-SVD) | 0.3 | 65.26512364 | 0.833571755 | 0.75 | 0.08 |
| Baseline (Spatial LSB) | 0.3 | 55.97975021 | 0.14394179 | 1 | 0 |
Figure 12.
Comparison of processing time.
Figure 13.
PSNR vs payload.
Figure 14.
NC vs payload.