Steganography is the discipline that deals with concealing the existence of secret communications. Existing research already provided several fundamentals for defining steganography and presented a multitude of hiding methods and countermeasures for this research discipline. We identified that no work exists that discusses the process of applying steganography from an individual's perspective. This paper presents a phase model that explains pre-conditions of applying steganography as well as the decision-making process and the final termination of a steganographic communication. The model can be used to explain whether an individual can use steganography and to explain whether and why an individual desires to use steganography. Moreover, the model can be used in research publications to indicate the addressed model's phase of scientific contributions. Furthermore, our model can be used to teach the process of steganography-application to students.
Simmons introduced his so-called that provides the fundamental scenario in which steganography is applied @cite_2 . In his scenario, two prisoners try to escape jail. For a successful escape, they need to work together. However, they cannot directly exchange messages. Instead, the only way to exchange messages is to hand over all messages to a so-called that can read and modify the messages. The prisoners need to apply steganography so that they can plan their escape without letting the warden notice. Simmons describes a generalized case of steganography-application that comprises two important elements that we discuss in our work: the reason that leads to the application of steganography as well as the decision-making process of the prisoners. Modifications of the Prisoner's Problem exist, e.g. @cite_27 .
@cite_27 @cite_2
2473397309 1878907771
A novel class of covert channel, out-of-band covert channels, is presented by extending Simmons’ prisoners’ problem. This new class of covert channel is established by surveying the existing covert channel, device-pairing, and side-channel research. Terminology as well as a taxonomy for out-of-band covert channels is also given. Additionally, a more comprehensive adversarial model based on a knowledgeable passive adversary and a capable active adversary is proposed in place of the current adversarial model, which relies on an oblivious passive adversary. Last, general protection mechanisms are presented, and an argument for a general measure of “covertness” to effectively compare covert channels is given. Two accomplices in a crime have been arrested and are about to be locked in widely separated cells. Their only means of communication after they are locked up will he by way of messages conveyed for them by trustees -- who are known to be agents of the warden. The warden is willing to allow the prisoners to exchange messages in the hope that he can deceive at least one of them into accepting as a genuine communication from the other either a fraudulent message created by the warden himself or else a modification by him of a genuine message. However, since he has every reason to suspect that the prisoners want to coordinate an escape plan, the warden will only permit the exchanges to occur if the information contained in the messages is completely open to him -- and presumably innocuous. The prisoners, on the other hand, are willing to accept these conditions, i.e., to accept some risk of deception in order to be able to communicate at all, since they need to coordinate their plans. To do this they will have to deceive the warden by finding a way of communicating secretly in the exchanges, i.e., of establishing a “subliminal channel” between them in full view of the warden, even though the messages themselves contain no secret (to the warden) information‡. Since they anticipate that the warden will try to deceive them by introducing fraudulent messages, they will only exchange messages if they are permitted to authenticate them.