2014). Thats why, we considerate four groups in this
way:in the first group, users curiosity is moderately
important, it increases in the second month to reach
the maximal audience interest, it decreases later in
the third month to the minimal bound in the fourth
one. The second level in the hierarchy represents
the geographic criterion where we propose to divide
VOD users to two essential regions:Zone
A where
the piracy phenomenon is very important, especially
in Asia and Africa continents, and Zone
B where
the piracy phenomenon is less important especially
in Europe, America and Austria. We divide each
continent to two groups of principal countries in
the third level. In the fourth and the fifth levels,
we are interested in social criteria, respectively the
age and the gender ones. Once the hierarchy is
fixed, we form communities so that users having the
same characteristics belong to the same community
and have more probability to collude together in a
forgery attempt than with users belonging to other
communities. The resulting fingerprint for each user
is the concatenation of his community identifier
concatenated to his personal identifier which is
encoded with Tardos code.
Final identifer = id level1 + id level2+ ..
+id level5+ personal id
(1)
This hierarchy strategy is taken especially to reduce
computational costs and time during the Tardos accu-
sation process. Instead of parsing the totality of em-
bedded codewords, we search firstly the committee
having the highest similarity to the group identifier of
the colluded codeword, and then we compute users
scores belonging to it. The VOD context does not re-
quire that the tracing step should be performed in real
time. The whole operations of decoding and accusa-
tion are made offline. In the next section, we describe
the used watermarking technique.
3.2 Embedding Strategy: Audio
Watermarking Technique using
DCT Transform
Embedding collusion secure fingerprint codes with a
robust watermarking technique has necessarily im-
pacts in a tracing scheme, mainly against different
types of attacks. In our tracing approach, we propose
to use an audio watermarking technique described in
details in (Charfeddine et al., 2010) and then applying
DCT to them. The watermark is inserted in the middle
frequencies of each block. The watermark is hidden
especially in the sample closest to the averagevalue of
a localized middle frequencies band. The neural Net-
work is used here to be trained to retrieve from eight
neighbors samples the nearest sample having the best
embedding position. The resulting watermarked sig-
nal is obtained after applying the IDCT. The detection
step is the inverse process of the insertion one. Once
the multi-level fingerprint is embedded, the video is
diffused. The tracing process is launched then in the
distributor side.
3.3 Tracing Process
As shown in figure 2, the whole framework can be
divided into multiple phases: when the supplier de-
tects a copy with unknown fingerprint Y, he decides
to trace back colluders by analyzing the watermark
to extract its ID
group
and retrieving its belonging to a
community. The tracing is performed by the Tardos
code, which represents our forensic code. This proba-
bilistic code consists in generating firstly a set of den-
sity probabilities {p
1
··· p
m
} ∈ {0··· 1} and then con-
structing a matrix of n codewords X
ji
of length m with
Prob[X
ji
=1] = p
i
.In our approach, we use the sym-
metric function to decode whatever is the collusion
strategy. The correlation between the suspicious fin-
gerprint and codewords and the score S
j, j∈{1...n}
per
user are computed with ε
1
and ε
2
are respectively the
false positive and the false negative error probabili-
ties:
S
j
=
m
∑
i=1
g(Y
i
, X
ji
, p
i
) (2)
g(1, 1, p) = g(0, 0, 1− p) =
s
(1− p)
p
g(1, 0, p) = g(0, 1, 1− p) = −
r
p
(1− p)
(3)
It is applied only to users in the selected commu-
nity. We assume that users in the same commu-
nity have more probability to collude together (Des-
oubeaux et al., 2012) than with users belonging to an-
other community. We compute the score Sj per user in
the corresponding community. The principle of Tar-
dos accusation is to compute the similarity between
the codeword X
j
and the suspicious word Y for each
position j.The user whose score is higher than the
threshold Z is thus accused. Steps of the Tardos accu-
sation process are more detailed in (Chaabane et al.,
2013). At the last, as a result of our tracing algorithm,
we compute the detection rate of our system, if we
obtain a detection rate det rate close to 100%, the ac-
cusation is successful, which means that the number
of retrieved users Retrieved collu is equal to the real
number of Our tracing algorithm is briefly detailed
below; we assume that inputs are respectively: the
code length m, the collusion size c, the threshold Z
and the suspicious word Y. colluders c.
SIGMAP2014-InternationalConferenceonSignalProcessingandMultimediaApplications
292