Cited by 217Chaos-based Image/Signal EncryptionCryptographic Implementations and SecurityComputer Science and Engineering

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 137 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 22 of the 66 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

When an attacker meets a cipher-image in 2018: A year in review

Open access
Li, Chengqing, Zhang, Yun, Xie, Eric Yong·2019·Journal of Information Security and Applications

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review surveys representative image encryption schemes and image cryptanalysis works published in 2018, classifying them by essential structure and application scenario. It argues that many chaos-based image ciphers remain vulnerable to chosen-plaintext and related attacks, and that widely used security metrics are inadequate.

Key findings

  • The dominant image-encryption structure remains permutation-then-diffusion without substitution-box (PTD-WOS); only a small number of chaotic image encryption schemes use an S-box.
  • In 2018, about 30 papers on image cryptanalysis were published; the most striking work is said to depreciate the motivation of most chaos-based encryption schemes and to question metrics such as correlation, entropy, histogram variance, NPCR, UACI, key sensitivity, differential-attack robustness, sequence test, and NIST randomness test.
  • Many one-round PTD-WOS schemes are reported vulnerable to chosen-plaintext attack; examples include schemes in [52,37], a plain-image sensitivity mechanism cancelable with probability 1/256 in [117], and recovery of an equivalent secret key using 512 chosen plain-image/cipher-image pairs in [123].
  • The paper summarizes challenges including no specific application scenario in most designs, neglect of special image formats, neglect of S-box importance, omitted weak randomness of chaos-based PRNGs, misuse of security test metrics, and designers ignoring previous cryptanalysis lessons.

Methods

  • Literature review/survey from the viewpoint of an image cryptanalyst: representative image encryption schemes proposed in 2018 are selected and classified by essential structure, while almost all image cryptanalysis works published in 2018 are surveyed due to their small number.
  • Source scope includes a Web of Science Core Collection search for “image” and “cryptograph* or encrypt*” in the Topic field, which found about 1,000 publication records in 2018, plus some top conferences on nonlinear sciences and signal processing such as ISCAS and ICME.
  • Analysis is qualitative: encryption schemes are grouped into chaos-based, DNA-encoding, transform-domain, encrypted-domain signal processing, and other application scenarios; cryptanalysis works are grouped into single-round PTD-WOS, complex-structure schemes, and other attacks.

Limitations

  • The paper does not state a formal limitations section; it notes that almost all image cryptanalysis works published in 2018 are surveyed because of their small number, but encryption schemes are selected as “most representative” rather than exhaustively.
  • Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without a reported systematic search protocol, explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria, or quantitative synthesis.
  • Evident from the text: conclusions about security metrics and scheme vulnerabilities rely on cited works; no new experiments or independent benchmarks are presented.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jisa.2019.102361

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

21 No full text of the sources · 12 Own interpretation · 11 Partly supported · 3 Supported so far · 3 No basis given · 2 Supported · 2 Not checked yet · 1 Not supported · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 1 references — free account

Show all 30 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 16
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 9
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
25 of 25
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The selected works are representative of the image encryption and cryptanalysis works proposed in 2018.

    “The most representative works among them are selected and classified according to their essential structures.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Classifying the surveyed works according to their essential structures is a valid way to organize and compare them.

    “The most representative works among them are selected and classified according to their essential structures.”
2 of 2

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

2 retracted

Show all 137 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Puteaux, 2018, An efficient MSB prediction-based method for high-capacity reversible data hiding in encrypted images, IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur, 13, 1670, 10.1109/TIFS.2018.2799381 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 214

Metadata

Authors
Li, C., Zhang, Y., & Xie, E. Y.
Affiliations
  • Hunan University (CN)
  • Xiangtan University (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Chengqing
Venue
Journal of Information Security and Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-10
Volume
48
Pages
102361
ISSN
2214-2126 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2923415235
Cited by
217
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 66 · 2019: 20
FWCI
18.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Information Security and Applications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Chaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptographic Implementations and Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Computer Science and Engineering
Keywords
image encryption, cryptanalysis attacks, image security

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review