The algorithm changes pixels based on the supplied password to create the hash encryption. For example one pixel might be have one extra bit another pixel might be have two bits, another might not be changed, and so on.
Thus, it's impossible to detect without the original image or the password. And even if you had both images, a human couldn't detect the changes. A binary level analyzer might, but even that is hard to do because you don't know if the changes are cause by JPEG compression or by the secret message. Thus, it's a very secure method of sharing information.
Now, I did find the Space Force picture everybody was talking about had 200k of extra information than the original size reported by the camara; 3.7mb verse 3.9mb. Other images only differ by a single digit rounding error: 2.5mb verse 2.6mb. Also, the image went through five conversions from the original. So, who knows!
I was reading about steganography last night.
The algorithm changes pixels based on the supplied password to create the hash encryption. For example one pixel might be have one extra bit another pixel might be have two bits, another might not be changed, and so on.
Thus, it's impossible to detect without the original image or the password. And even if you had both images, a human couldn't detect the changes. A binary level analyzer might, but even that is hard to do because you don't know if the changes are cause by JPEG compression or by the secret message. Thus, it's a very secure method of sharing information.
Now, I did find the Space Force picture everybody was talking about had 200k of extra information than the original size reported by the camara; 3.7mb verse 3.9mb. Other images only differ by a single digit rounding error: 2.5mb verse 2.6mb. Also, the image went through five conversions from the original. So, who knows!