A SECURE DNA CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON STEGANOGRAPHY AND INDEXING CIPHER

International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA) Vol.14, No.1, January 2022
DOI: 10.5121/ijnsa.2022.14104 53
A SECURE DNA CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON
STEGANOGRAPHY AND INDEXING CIPHER
Tamer Barakat1
, Nahed Mahmoud1
, Ihab. A. Ali2
and Mohamed Hamdi1
1
Department of Communications and Electronics, Fayoum University, Egypt
2
Department of Communications and Electronics, Helwan University, Egypt
ABSTRACT
One of the essential challenges nowadays; is how to secure data with the increase of its volume as well as
its transmission rate. The most frequent approach used to give a high degree of protection, preserve data
from hackers, and accomplish multilayer security is steganography combined with encryption. DNA
(Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is considered as a new promising carrier for data security while achieving
powerful security and maximum protection. In this paper, a secure DNA cryptosystem model which
combines steganography with encryption is introduced and categorized into two layers. The original data
are hidden in the first layer into a reference DNA based on the insertion method to obtain a fake DNA
sequence. In the second layer, this fake DNA sequence, which is the first layer's output, is encrypted using
an indexing cipher to produce an encrypted message in the form of indexes. The proposed model
guarantees multilayer security to the secret data with high performance and low-time wasting. It addresses
the long-generation key problem of the DNA cryptography. The experimental results assess and validate
the theoretical security analysis and model performance.
KEYWORDS
DNA cryptography, Steganography, Indexing cipher, Multilayer security, Reference DNA
1. INTRODUCTION
DNA is one of the most recent fields used in cryptography due to the genome carrier's great
storage capacity (1 gm. of DNA can store 106
TB of data) as well as its huge randomness.
Random sequences like DNA sequence is considered to be an excellent candidate for use in
cryptography [1]. DNA cryptography intends to achieve greater security than conventional
cryptography when encrypting data by combining biological and computational properties [2].
DNA is a real carrier of data that can be encoded according to the four-letter alphabet; A, C, G,
and T [3]. These bases can be converted into binary according to the binary coding rule
mentioned in Table 1.
Table 1. Binary Coding Rule
Nucleotide Binary Number
A 00
C 01
G 10
T 11

54
Information security is an important issue when transferring a secret message between sender and
receiver for achieving data confidentiality. Cryptography which can be also referred to as data
encryption is used to obtain a secret data writing through enciphering and deciphering using a
secret key and a cryptographic algorithm. While the protection of the secret data is the main
purpose in security when transmitting data over networks, cryptography isn’t sufficient to provide
complete security [4]. Consequently, cryptography must be combined with data hiding techniques
or steganography methods to enhance the security and achieve strong data protection[5]. In this
paper, the insertion technique is introduced for data hiding method combined with encryption of
DNA indexing cipher.
A new direction of DNA computing based on DNA cryptography started with Adleman to
introduce a perfect solution for algorithms that requires a huge amount of computations was
introduced by [6]. Procedures of DNA OTP encryption schemes are provided as a medium for
high computation and for high storage capacity to solve the problem of one-time-pads limited
size which used in cryptographic systems, as illustrated in [7]. DNA steganography has been
recently found to be a very promising research [8]. In [8], DNA steganography is introduced, in
which data is encoded in DNA and hidden in microdots.A pioneer idea which is the essential
concept for DNA indexing cipher is presented in [9] to encrypt text and image where The concept
to use DNA computing in cryptography is introduced to improve the security of cryptosystems.
This is considered the basic idea of our work. The DNA sequence used for encryption is very
long; as a result, the average runtime in the experimental results is very high too. DNA
chromosomes are used as OTP structure as shown by [10] to encrypt the secret message with the
principle of DNA indexing cipher without any experimental results for security analysis and
performances. Security level and performances of the algorithm in [10] are analysed by [11] but
the secret key is very long and the decryption time was higher than the encryption time.
Moreover, the algorithm is unsecured against the related key attack.
In this work, a secure DNA cryptosystem is introduced to eliminate the DNA indexing cipher that
appeared in the recent researches by combining another layer of insertion DNA steganography
method with it.
2. MOTIVATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
2.1. Motivations
DNA cryptography has significantly become one of the newest technologies in information
security. It provides the strength of the genomic database in addition to the basic solutions in
cryptography. Therefore, various DNA encryption algorithms are proposed to enhance security in
DNA cryptosystem, one of them is the DNA indexing algorithm presented in [11] which ensures
a good level of security but, a certain level of vulnerability can be specified to the related-key
attack. In the related-key attacks, key transformations can be applied to the secret key. So, the
adversary can request plaintext's encryption using the transformed key until the secret key can be
successfully guessed. In besides, the DNA sequence used for encoding and decoding is very long
which in turn increases the computation runtime.
2.2. Contributions
To overcome the problem of the DNA indexing algorithm and improve its security, a secure
DNA cryptosystem model with double layers of steganography and encryption is presented. In
the first layer, the original message will be hidden within reference DNA using the insertion
technique to create a fake DNA message. The fake DNA message will next be encrypted using

55
the DNA indexing cipher to generate random indices. The proposed model will entirely secure
the original message even if an attacker obtains the decryption key since the original plaintext is
still protected and unknown because it is hidden in fake DNA in the first layer.
Therefore, this model provides a multilayer of security against cryptanalytic attacks and as a
result, solves the problem of related-key attack by protecting the original message. In addition,
the key sequence used in the proposed model is one-third the length that used in [11] which
achieves higher performance and evaluation levels for this model.
3. PROPOSED MODEL
Double layer DNA indexing encryption model (DLDI) uses one-time pad symmetric encryption
which is considered the essential idea for this model to encrypt each word with one pad for one
time. In DLDI model, (OTP) secret key is a genomic DNA sequence downloaded from one of the
genomic databases, for example, GenBank, DDBJ, etc. [12]. Encryption is ensured with a
genomic key composed of thousands of nucleotide bases. Each genomic key has an ID number
which is a unique number with 6 to 8 characters. Recipient must know the ID number which is
the key for decryption. In a symmetric key cryptosystem, the encryption key is the same for
decryption. So, DLDI model shall protect the original message for an additional time in the case
of knowing this key. This is done using the insertion data hiding method which is layer one in
DLDI model. In layer two, the encryption process is based upon the indexing encryption
presented in [11]. The two layers will be explained below.
3.1. Encryption Process
3.1.1. Layer One
Layer 1 is a modification to the algorithm introduced in [11]. Using the insertion data hiding
method in this layer as described in [13] as follows:
Step1: the original message is transformed into decimal ASCII codes then into binary to be the
first input to the insertion method.
Step 2: DNA sequence is represented in binary form (S) by using the binary coding which is
explained in (Table 1) to be the second input to the insertion method.
Step 3: A number sequence (𝒓𝟏,𝒓𝟐, … 𝒓𝒕−𝟏) is generated using seed R, the smallest integer t is
calculated such that ∑ ri
t
i=1 ˃ [M] where (t) is the length's number of the residual part of the
message, and a number sequence (𝒌𝟏, 𝒌𝟐, … 𝒌𝒕−𝟏) using seed K is generated too.
Step 4: Message (M) is divided into segments (𝐦𝟏,𝐦𝟐,… 𝒎𝒕−𝟏) with lengths (𝐫𝟏, 𝐫𝟐, … 𝐫𝐭−𝟏) and
the residual part will be mt.
Step 5: binary sequence (S) is divided into segments (𝐬𝟏,𝐬𝟐, … 𝐬𝐭−𝟏) with lengths (𝒌𝟏, 𝒌𝟐, … 𝒌𝒕−𝟏)
and neglect the residual part of the sequence.
Step 6: Insert each segment of [M] as a prefix into each segment of the binary sequence (S) then
add the segment 𝐦𝐭 at the end of 𝒔𝒕−𝟏.
Step 7: Finally, the inverse function of the binary coding is used to obtain an output with a fake
DNA sequence that contains the secret message. Figure 1 explains the DNA insertion method.

56
Figure 1. DNA Insertion Method
Various algorithms preferred using data hiding after encryption but, in this work, it is preferred to
use data hiding before encryption to overcome the problems of DNA indexing encryption while
obtaining a high number of substitutions for each plaintext byte without using a very long secret
key and achieving a high protection for the secret message.
3.1.2. Layer Two
In this layer, DNA indexing encryption based upon the chromosomal sequence is used as a book
to hide the fake DNA output from layer 1. This is done by building a key table that contains all
the 256 possible values of any byte. Each byte of those possible values is converted into 4 letter
sequence using this principle: 10 01 11 00 → GCTA. Searching one byte at a time through the
key sequence containing letters: A, C, G, and T Each time this byte sequence is returned in the
chromosomal sequence, its position index is memorized in a vector as one of the possible
substitutions of it. All substitution vectors of all bytes are memorized in the key table with size
256xN, where N is variable depending on the number of substitutions of each byte in this table.
So, encryption of fake DNA is executed one byte at a time which is a substitution of the byte
selected randomly from its retrieved vector in the key table.
All ciphers that were chosen randomly for all bytes represent the cipher text as presented in
Figure 2.

57
Figure 2. Encryption Process for DLDI Model
In DLDI model there is no need to use a very long chromosomal sequence to obtain a large
number of substitutions and choosing randomly one cipher from it for each plain text character
like the one used in [11]. Each character from the secret message will be encrypted to more than
one cipher from a group of substitutions, explained in the following example.
Using key sequence with length 10,000 bases will be enough to achieve a high level of security
and low computational time.
3.1.3. Demonstrative Example
Assume message M: 'h', DNA sequence (S): GCGCCCAATACGCAAA ….. with 10,000 bases,
message segment length: r=2, and DNA segment length: k=4
 Hiding Layer
Step 1: Convert the plaintext "h" into ASCII: 104 then into binary: 01101000.
Step 2: Get the binary form of (S) using Table 1 to be:
10011001010100001100011001000000........
Step 3: Divide M into segments with r =2 for each segment: 01, 10, 10, 00.
Step 4: Divide S into segments with k=4 for each segment:
1001, 1001, 0101, 0000, 1100, 0110, 0100, 0000........till the end of S.
Step 5: Insert each segment from binary M one at a time into the beginning of segments of S
till the end of M: 011001 101001 100101 000000.
Step 6: Use the inverse function of binary coding rule to obtain the fake DNA output (S')
CGCGGCGCCAAA.

58
 Encryption Layer
(a) For each byte of this output fake DNA from layer 1, a search in the key table explained in
Table 2 is performed to retrieve its vector and choose randomly a substitution to be its cipher.
Substitutions of CGCG: 90,415, 1408,…… Ciphertext: 1408
Substitutions of GCGC: 481, 7020 ,3001……… Ciphertext : 3001
Substitutions of CAAA: 8578, 620, 8070,…… Ciphertext: 8578
(b) The ciphertext of "h": 1408 3001 8578 (more than one cipher for one character from the
secret message).
Table 2. Key Table
The maximum number of substitutions that is retrieved in the key table using a DNA
sequence with 10,000 bases is 116 substitution values, and the minimum one is 10
substitution values.
3.2. Decryption Process
DLDI model is a symmetric key cryptosystem so; both encryption and decryption use the same
key. The receiver has the same coding rule and the values (r and k). Each index from the
ciphertext is considered as a pointer to indicate the equivalent DNA byte sequence for every byte
from the fake message (S'). Then, it is transformed into binary using the same coding rule and
divided into segments with length (r + k) for each one. Finally, extract segments with length r to
be the secret message m.
It can be observed that every letter from the original message has more than one substitution from
the DNA sequence to be hidden in it and every DNA byte has more than one substitution from
the key table which means that the DLDI model guarantees a high level of security for every
letter from the original message without using long chromosomal sequence. In addition,
ciphertext size is different from plaintext size based upon the DNA segment length where one bit
DNA segment length can obtain a fake message before encryption and a different size of
ciphertext after it.
Substitutions
DNA equivalent
256 possible
values
720,1200,………….
AAAA
00000000
……………………
…………………….
…………….
5436,320,900,………
AACT
00000111
8578,620,8070………..
CAAA
01000000
90,415 ,1408,……
CGCG
01100110
7020,481, 3001,……
GCGC
10011001
202,7028,100,………..
TTTT
11111111

59
4. DATA DESCRIPTION
The quality of our proposed model is evaluated by encrypting different input texts and images
with different sizes. These input data are described in Table 3 and Table 4.
Table 3. Dataset for Image
No Image Name Image Size
1 Lena_color.tiff 512 X 512
2 Apple.jpg 225 X 225
3 Cameramen.jpg 225 X 225
Table 4. Dataset for Text
5. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND SECURITY ANALYSIS OF THE MODEL
Two important features that discriminate any cryptographic algorithm from another are its
capability to protect data against attacks as well as its speed doing so.
5.1. Performance Evaluation
In this work, Execution time was analysed for three important operations of the DLDI model: key
table runtime, encryption and decryption. The key table is executed in 2*256*n operations where
256 is the number of all possible values for each byte and the length of the secret DNA sequence
is n. Complexity of the key table computation is O(n), for encryption O(m) and for decryption
O(c) where m is the number of plaintext characters and c is the number of ciphertext characters
thus the execution time growing rate is linear according to the input size. The experimental
results were implemented using MATLAB R2016a and ran on 2.6 GHZ processor under
Windows 7 Ultimate.
The program was executed for different lengths of n and different sizes of m and c. The
computation time measurements are introduced through Table 5 to 9. The execution time of the
key table is the same before and after modification. Comparison before and after modification
was implemented using a 10,000 bases DNA sequence. Before modification, plaintext size is
equal to ciphertext size as explained in Table 6 and Table 7.
Table 5. Computation Runtime of the Key table
No Text Name Text Size (KB)
1 Text 1 26.4
2 Text 2 47
3 Text 3 70.9
4 Text 4 103.1
5 Text 5 156.9
Key length (nucleotides) Computation time (ms)
1000 140
5000 452
10000 769
15000 1138
20000 1412

60
Table 6. Encryption Runtime Before Modification
Plaintext Size (KB) Runtime (ms)
26.4 196
47 333
70.9 403
103.1 638
156.9 969
Table 7. Decryption Runtime Before Modification
The modification was analysed using the same DNA sequence with message segment length
(r=20) and DNA segment length (k=2). The ciphertext size after modification is different for the
same Plaintext size used in Table 7.
Table 8. Encryption Runtime after Modification
Plaintext size (KB) Runtime (ms)
26.4 111
47 206
70.9 278
103.1 390
156.9 568
Table 9. Decryption Runtime after Modification
Ciphertext Size (KB) Runtime (ms)
29.1 51
51.9 88
78.1 107
113.4 141
172.6 184
As explained in (Table 9), Decryption Runtime after modification is almost one-half the size
before modification especially in large ciphertext size. Consequently, these results proved the
high performance of this model. Graphing of the execution time before and after modification is
shown below from Figure 3 to Figure 5.
Ciphertext size (KB) Runtime (ms)
26.4 56
47 91
70.9 158
103.1 224
156.9 294

61
Figure 3. Growing Rate of Key Table execution Time
Figure 4. Growing Rate of Encryption and Decryption Runtime before Modification
Figure 5. Growing rate of Encryption and Decryption Runtime after modification

62
5.2. Security Analysis for DLDI Model
The security analysis is classified into three main categories: statistical measurements, keyspace
(brute force) and cryptanalytic attacks.
5.2.1. Histogram Analysis
Histogram is one of the statistical measurements that enable visualizing the probability
distribution of the signal. With a specified range of values in a signal, the occurrence of each
value for it is shown by the histogram [14]. To resist the statistical attacks, a secure encryption
system must provide a uniform histogram for the ciphertext [15]. Histograms of plaintext and
ciphertext are shown in Figure 6.
(a) (b)
Figure 6. Plain image (a) histogram of plain image and encrypted image (b) for DLDI model
Figure 6.b shows that the distribution of the encrypted images is different completely from the
distribution of the plain images (Figure 6.a). Hence, our model provides a uniform distribution
for the cipher images. In addition, there are no matched patterns between the plaintext and
ciphertext histograms thus, a high level of security is ensured here. Histogram analysis was also
implemented on a text containing 26400 characters as presented in Figure 7.
Figure 7. Histogram of a Plaintext and its Ciphertext

63
It can be noticed that there is a small range of characters in the plaintext while it has a high range
of corresponding random cipher in the ciphertext. Hence, it is impossible to recognize the
plaintext from the ciphertext.
5.2.2. Entropy Analysis
Entropy is another statistical measurement used to measure the randomness of the ciphertext and
the security strength of the signal [16]. Experimental results are presented in Table 10 shows the
information entropy analysis before and after modification. Measurements are implemented for
text and image files.
Table 10. Plaintext and Ciphertext Entropy analysis before and after modification
Ciphertext Entropy
after Modification
Ciphertext Entropy
Before Modification in
[11]
Entropy of the
Plaintext
Plaintext type
Text files
12.0840
9.5455
4.6724
Text 1
10.5982
8.6181
3.3924
Text 2
12.2002
9.4937
4.5869
Text 3
Images
12.9134
12.4267
7.4451
Lena_color.tiff
10.4027
9.3905
4.1632
Apple.jpg
12.7169
11.9932
7.0896
Cameramen.jpg
Table 10 demonstrates that the entropy of the ciphertext is three times higher than the plaintext
entropy for text files and almost twice higher than the plaintext entropy for image. A great value
of entropy reaching its maximum value (14 bits/symbol) for the codeword of the ciphertext as,
the maximum length of the key sequence is 10000 bases which ensure that it is more effective.
5.2.3. Correlation Analysis
Correlation coefficient (CC) is an important statistical measurement that indicates the degree of
dependence between two values like pixels or letters. The range of CC values is from (-1) to (+1)
where ±1 refers that the two values are linked to each other (0) indicates that they may be
independent. So, CC is desired to be low as possible when analyzing the ciphertext.
Table 11. Plaintext and Ciphertext correlation analysis before and after modification
CC of the ciphertext
after modification
CC of the Ciphertext
before Modification
In [11]
CC of the
plaintext
Plaintext type
Text files
0.0088
0.031
1
Text 1
0.0022
0.0134
1
Text 2
Images
0.0011
0.0135
1
Parrot bird.jpg
0.0057
0.0249
0.9988
Apple.jpg
0.0013
0.0184
0.9853
Cameramen.jpg

64
Table 11 indicates that the CC of the plaintext is 1 or close to 1 while the CC of the ciphertext is
close to 0 for DLDI model after modification compared with results in [11] which ensures that
the proposed model is effective against different attacks.
5.2.4. Key Space
Key space is one of the main parameters that represent the ability of the algorithm to resist any
possible brute-force attack. In DLDI model both encryption and the decryption key is a genetic
sequence downloaded from a public database like GenBank which contains millions of DNA
sequences reaching around 218642238 sequences [12]. Thus, the key space is equal to the
number of all sequences in this large database. Moreover, the genetic sequence used in it is at
least 10,000 bases with four letters: A, C, G, and T which means trying 410000
possible keys.
5.2.5. Cryptanalytic Attacks
To crack the proposed model, there are two main information must be known: DNA reference
used for data hiding layer and the key used for encryption layer.
 The probability of an intruder to have a successful guess about the DNA reference used for
data hiding method and DNA binary coding rule as illustrated in [17] but with a change of
2.18 *108
instead of 1.63 *108
for the newest number of DNA sequences in GenBank
database is given below:
P(RG) =
1
2.18∗108∗24∗16
(1)
 The probability of an intruder to have a successful guess about the key used for encryption in
this model where there are 4 nucleotides with 10,000 bases for the reference key is:
P(KG) =
1
410000 (2)
As a result, the total probability of an intruder to attack the proposed model can be calculated by
combining Equation 1 and Equation 2.
P(RG) =
1
2.18∗108∗24∗16∗410000 (3)
Therefore, combination between data hiding method and DNA indexing cipher makes the
proposed model more robust against several attacks.
DLDI model can be resistant to chosen- ciphertext attack as plaintext isn't ciphered directly but
hidden in a fake DNA sequence then ciphered thus makes it very hard to know plaintext from a
chosen ciphertext. As it can resist a chosen-ciphertext attack so, it has the capability to resist the
other main attacks such that: known-plaintext, chosen-plaintext, and ciphertext-only attack. It
guarantees a good level of protection for the original data against related-key attacks as in the
case of knowing the encryption key; the adversary can’t know the secret data until the method
used for data hiding and number seeds (r, k) are known. Since this model introduces more
additional time to protect information.

65
6. COMPARISON WITH OTHER RECENT WORKS
Various evaluation parameters like entropy, correlation, and key space ensured that the results of
our proposed model are better than other encryption algorithms. A comparison of our work with
other recent works is shown in Table 12 to Table 14.
Table 12. Comparison of Information Entropy Analysis Using different Encryption Algorithms
Encryption
Algorithms
Image Name Image Size Original Ciphered
Proposed Lena 512 X 512 7.4451 12.9134
[18] Lena 256 X 256 7.2699 7.9974
[19] Lena 256 X 256 7.7532 7.99924
Table 13. Correlation Analysis for Lena Image
Lena Image Size CC of the Encrypted
Image
Proposed 512 X 512 0.0023
[18] 256 X 256 0.0086
[19] 256 X 256 0.00106
Table 14. Comparison of key Space with other Recent Algorithms
Recent Works Key Space
Proposed 2.18 X 108
+ 410000
[18] 10195
[20] 1088
7. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
In this study, a new DNA-based steganography and encryption is proposed. It enhanced the
security strength of the DNA indexing encryption and provided multilayer security to the secret
message. Additionally, it eliminated the problem of long key generation which is an essential
problem in recent algorithms based on DNA cryptography. It provided maximum protection and
perfect hiding to the original data to be secure against related key attacks. Moreover, we achieved
a higher time performance. Text and image transmission were implemented and proved with
security measurements.
As a future work, we will expand the implementation for video and audio applications. The
security proof for related key attack will be introduced as well.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Pavithran, S. Mathew, S. Namasudra, and P. Lorenz, “A novel cryptosystem based on DNA
cryptography and randomly generated mealy machine,” Comput. Secur., vol. 104, pp. 102–160, 2020,
doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2020.102160.
[2] A. Das, S. K. Sarma, and S. Deka, “Data Security with DNA Cryptography,” in Transactions on
Engineering Technologies, 2019, pp. 159–173, doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-8273-8.
[3] M. Mondal and K. S. Ray, “Review on DNA Cryptography,” arXiv Prepr. arXiv1904.05528, pp. 1–

66
31, 2019.
[4] G. Hamed, M. Marey, S. A. El-Sayed, and M. F. Tolba, “Hybrid technique for steganography-based
on DNA with n-bits binary coding rule,” in 2015 7th International Conference of Soft Computing and
Pattern Recognition (SoCPaR), 2015, pp. 95–102, doi: 10.1109/SOCPAR.2015.7492790.
[5] M. S. Taha, M. S. Mohd Rahim, S. A. Lafta, M. M. Hashim, and H. M. Alzuabidi, “Combination of
Steganography and Cryptography: A short Survey,” in IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering, 2019, vol. 518, no. 5, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/518/5/052003.
[6] A. Gahlaut, A. Bharti, Y. Dogra, and P. Singh, “DNA based cryptography,” Int. J. Cyber-Security
Digit. Forensics, vol. 750, pp. 205–215, 2017, doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-6544-6_20.
[7] J. Zhang and J. Zhang, “DNA based random key generation and management for OTP encryption,”
Biosystems, pp. 51–63, 2017.
[8] S. Marwan, A. Shawish, and K. A. Nagaty, “Utilizing DNA Strands for Secured Data-Hiding with
High Capacity,” Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 88–98, 2017, doi:
10.3991/ijim.v11i2.6565.
[9] S. T. Amin, M. Saeb, and S. El-Gindi, “A DNA-based implementation of yaea encryption algorithm,”
in Proceedings of the 2nd IASTED International Conference on Computational Intelligence, 2006,
pp. 116–120.
[10] O. Tornea, B. Monica, H. Tatiana, and M.-F. Vaida, “Encryption system with Indexing DNA
chromosomes cryptographic algorithm,” IASTED Int. Conf. Biomed. Eng., vol. 680, no. 99, pp. 12–
15, 2010.
[11] O. Tornea and M. E. Borda, “Security and Complexity of a DNA-Based Cipher,” RoEduNet Int.
Conf. IEEE, pp. 1–5, 2013, doi: 10.1109/RoEduNet.2013.6511755.
[12] “GenBank and WGS Statistics.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/statistics/ (accessed Dec. 17,
2020).
[13] H. J. Shiu, K. L. Ng, J. F. Fang, R. C. T. Lee, and C. H. Huang, “Data hiding methods based upon
DNA sequences,” Inf. Sci. (Ny)., vol. 180, no. 11, pp. 2196–2208, 2010, [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2010.01.030.
[14] D. Balanici, V. Tomsa, M. Borda, and R. Malutan, “Full duplex OTP cryptosystem based on DNA
Key for text transmissions.,” Int. Conf. Inf. Technol. Commun. Springer, Cham, pp. 39–48, 2015.
[15] H. Zhu, C. Zhao, X. Zhang, and L. Yang, “An image encryption scheme using generalized Arnold
map and affine cipher,” Optik (Stuttg)., vol. 125, no. 22, pp. 6672–6677, 2014, doi:
10.1016/j.ijleo.2014.06.149.
[16] M. Borda, “Fundamentals in information theory and coding,” in Springer Science & Business Media.,
2011, pp. 1–504.
[17] S. Marwan, A. Shawish, and K. Nagaty, “An enhanced DNA-based steganography technique with a
higher hiding capacity,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Bioinformatics Models,
Methods and Algorithms, 2015, pp. 150–157, doi: 10.5220/0005246501500157.
[18] N. Iqbal, M. Hanif, S. Abbas, M. A. Khan, and Z. Ul Rehman, “Dynamic 3D scrambled image based
RGB image encryption scheme using hyperchaotic system and DNA encoding,” J. Inf. Secur. Appl.,
vol. 58, pp. 1–19, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jisa.2021.102809.
[19] K. C. Jithin and S. Sankar, “Colour image encryption algorithm combining, Arnold map, DNA
sequence operation, and a Mandelbrot set,” J. Inf. Secur. Appl., vol. 50, pp. 1–22, 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.jisa.2019.102428.
[20] X. Wang, Y. Wang, X. Zhu, and C. Luo, “A novel chaotic algorithm for image encryption utilizing
one-time pad based on pixel level and DNA level,” Opt. Lasers Eng., vol. 125, pp. 1–12, 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.optlaseng.2019.105851.

A SECURE DNA CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON STEGANOGRAPHY AND INDEXING CIPHER

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to A SECURE DNA CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON STEGANOGRAPHY AND INDEXING CIPHER (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A SECURE DNA CRYPTOSYSTEM BASED ON STEGANOGRAPHY AND INDEXING CIPHER