Acutally, that's probably the best way to this. The key to effective
steganography is having a large amount of data to store a small amount
of data. So, if you don't mind having a db that's 10 to 100 times
bigger than it has to be to store the original data it should work.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Hector Beyers <hqbeyers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wow, this is really an idea I can work with.
> I know this is getting really brainstorming, but do you think it is possible
> to apply steganography (hiding data in pictures) tactics to the columns of a
> database?
> Regards
> Hector
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Peter Hunsberger
> <peter.hunsberger@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Hector Beyers <hqbeyers@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi guys,
>> > does ANYONE have any tips on hiding data on a database server? This
>> > means
>> > that data is stored in places that is not necessarily picked up in the
>> > schema of the database. I am doing some research on databases and need
>> > some
>> > direction.
>> > Any help or direction will be highly appreciated.
>>
>> Let me guess: an attempt at security by obscurity?
>>
>> I suppose you could always create a couple of columns such that some
>> function applied over them produced the real result (. You could even
>> actually store this in an index, so although you could never see the
>> result directly (except in a dump) queries to get at it might perform
>> half reasonably.
>>
>> --
>> Peter Hunsberger
>
>
--
When fascism comes to America, it will be intolerance sold as diversity.
