PreprintCited by 12Video Coding and Compression TechnologiesChaos-based Image/Signal EncryptionDigital Rights Management and Security

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Effectiveness of Crypto-Transcoding for H.264/AVC and HEVC Video Bit-streams

Open access

Abstract

To avoid delays arising from a need to decrypt a video prior to transcoding and then re-encrypt it afterwards, this paper assesses a selective encryption (SE) content protection scheme. The scheme is suited to both recent standardized codecs, namely H.264/Advanced Video Coding (AVC) and High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC). Specifically, the paper outlines a joint crypto-transcoding scheme for secure transrating of a video bitstream. That is to say it generates new video bitrates, possibly as part of an HTTP Adaptive Streaming (HAS) content delivery network. The scheme will reduce the bitrate to one or more lower desired bit-rate without consuming time in the encryption/decryption process, which would be the case when full encryption is used. In addition, the decryption key no longer needs to be exposed at intermediate middleboxes, including when transrating is performed in a cloud datacenter. The effectiveness of the scheme is variously evaluated: by examination of the SE generated visual distortion; by the extent of computational and bitrate overheads; and by choice of cipher when encrypting the selected elements within the bitstream. Results indicate that there remains: a content; quantization level (after transrating of an encrypted video); and codec-type dependency to any distortion introduced. A further recommendation is that the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) is preferred for SE to lightweight XOR encryption, despite it being taken up elsewhere as a real-time encryption method.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1902.06990

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 73 · Cited by 12

Metadata

Authors
Shah, R. A., Asghar, M. N., Abdullah, S., Fleury, M., & Gohar, N.
Affiliations
  • Islamia University of Bahawalpur (PK)
  • University of Essex (GB)
  • Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Women University Peshawar (PK)
Corresponding author
Fleury, Martin
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
Volume
78
Issue
15
Pages
21455-21484
ISSN
1380-7501 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2916264022
Cited by
12
References
73
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Multimedia Tools and Applications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research@THEA (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • University of Essex
  • Islamia University of Bahawalpur
  • University of Oxford
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Video Coding and Compression Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Chaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Rights Management and Security
Keywords
selective encryption, H.264/AVC, HEVC, HTTP adaptive streaming, content protection, cloud data centers, video distortion, AES, XOR encryption

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.

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