The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics

6CC543 Multimedia Security

University of Derby
The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics

In-course Assignment Specification

Module Code and Title: 6CC543 Multimedia Security

Assignment Title: Assignment 2 - Investigating Digital Watermarking Systems for Copyright

Protection of the Digital Assets.
Assessment Tutor: Fatih Kurugollu Weighting Towards Module Grade: 50%
Date Set: 21/02/2020 Hand-In Deadline Date for the Report:
Monday 27 April 2020 @ 23.59
Hand-In Deadline Date for the PowerPoint Presentation:
Wednesday 29 April 2020 @ 23.59
Feedback Date: 18 May 2020 @ 12.00

Penalty for Late Submission

Recognising that deadlines are an integral part of professional workplace practice, the University
expects students to meet all agreed deadlines for submission of assessments. However, the
University acknowledges that there may be circumstances which prevent students from meeting
deadlines. There are now 3 distinct processes in place to deal with differing student
circumstances:
1. Assessed Extended Deadline (AED): Students with disabilities or long term health issues
are entitled to a Support Plan.
2. Exceptional Extenuating Circumstances (EEC): The EEC policy applies to situations
where serious, unforeseen circumstances prevent the student from completing the
assignment on time or to the normal standard. Students who submit a successful EEC
claim will usually be required to complete a different assessment to that which was
originally set. http://www.derby.ac.uk/eec
3. Late Submission: Requests for late submission will be made to the relevant Head of
Discipline (or Head of Joint Honours for joint honours students) who can authorise an
extension of up to a maximum of one week. http://www.derby.ac.uk/campus/support

Anonymous Marking
The University of Derby has now implemented a general policy of anonymous marking and all
the Turnitin Submission system will hide your name from your tutors, until after moderation.
This module has an exemption due to the face-to-face nature of the formative reviews during
workshops and the face-to-face marking of your work. As a result, you MUST ensure that
you include your student number in the submission title of your work for formative review
and for the final submission of your completed report(s) or other components of a portfolio.
If you do not do this, it will be impossible for your tutor to provide any formative or
summative feedback during the face to face formative reviews and final marking, because they
will not be able to find your work and they may not be able to create the final mark for your
portfolio of work.

1
The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics
6CC543 Multimedia Security

In addition, you should not use your name on the title page, instead you should place your
student ID in the name field and you should only use the student number version of your
unimail (e.g. [email protected]). This ensures that the internal moderators cannot
identify you, thus ensuring that the moderation process is truly anonymous.

Plagiarism
A student is liable to be found guilty of plagiarism if any work presented for individual
assessment is found to contain the unacknowledged work of some other person or persons. If
this involves deliberate misrepresentation of material as the student’s own in an attempt to
deceive the examiners then the offence is very grave indeed.
All sources should be cited and all quotations from the works of other authors clearly identified
as such.
If a student’s work is found to contain verbatim (or near verbatim) quotation from the work of
other authors (including other students past or present) without clear acknowledgement, then
plagiarism has been committed whether or not the student intended to deceive the examiners”.

Level of Collaboration
NONE
The assignment should be carried out independently. That is, no collaboration is allowed.

Learning Outcomes covered in this Assignment:

1. Demonstrate knowledge and practical experience of protecting copyrights of
multimedia data
2. Critically evaluate copyright protection of multimedia data

Criteria for Assessment:

You must be able to demonstrate the ability to:
• Review literature to understand the given multimedia security methods on
copyright protection.
• Critically analyse these methods under given attacks
• Justify and present your conclusions on basic tests on multimedia security methods.
Deliveries and Submission:
In this assignment you will deliver:
1. A report based on your investigation in the assignment
2. A short PowerPoint presentation summarizing your report.

You must submit one electronic copy of the report as well as one electronic copy of your
PowerPoint presentation onto Blackboard through Turnitin by the above deadlines.

The file names of the report and the presentation should include only your student number
as explained. Use the following format:
<Student No>_Assignment_2.pdf
<Student No>_Assignment_2.ppt
Example : 1234567_Assignment_2.pdf and 1234567_Assignment_2.ppt

2
 The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics
6CC543 Multimedia Security

ASSIGNMENT
You are a member of a cyber security team in a company selling digital artistic images in the
online market. The company needs Digital Rights Management (DRM) systems for collecting
and managing copyrighted digital multimedia data including image, audio and video. Providing
copyright protection for the assets are also essential for a profitable, trustworthy and reliable
business.

You are asked to enhance current DRM with a digital watermarking system for copyright
protection of the digital assets. As a part of this activity you are asked to evaluate different
available watermarking methods under specific possible attack threats.

Based on your analyses and evaluations you are going to draw a conclusion which methods are
suitable for the desired watermarking system.

The knowledge acquired in the tutorials and the results obtained in the practical Labs will be
used in the assignment.

The assignment comprises the following steps:

1. Answering Lab Questions:
You will consider the watermarking methods developed in the Labs for copyright
protection part of DRM. You will answer the questions set in the Labs in this part of
the assignment. The methods will be evaluated according to the results obtained
under attacks.

2. Digital Watermarking Method from the Literature:

You will identify and select ONE digital watermarking method in the literature which
is different from the ones used in the Labs. Briefly introduce how embedding and
extracting watermark in this method. You need to report its performance according to
the considered attacks.

3. Evaluation:
You will provide an overall evaluation for the methods considering the methods
covered in the Labs as well as the selected method from the literature. Based on your
evaluation you will draw a conclusion for the method to be used as a copyright
protection mechanism for the company’s DRM system.

Report:
The word limit of the report is 2500 words, excluding the cover page, content page and reference
list. The structure of the report is as follows:
I. Introduction:
A brief introduction on the report.
II. Copyright Protection:
A. Evaluation of the Lab Results
You will evaluate the results obtained during Lab exercises by taking
into attacks considered in the experiments and answering the questions set in
the Labs.

3
 The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics
6CC543 Multimedia Security
The methods will be compared and appropriate decision for the overall
system will be provided.
B. Watermarking Method
The selected method should be presented briefly considering embedding and
extracting watermark and its pros and cons should be discussed.
C. Overall Evaluation
All considered methods in II.A and II.B will be compared considering the
attacks and a conclusion for the copyright protection system for the DRM
should be drawn.
III. Conclusion:
A brief conclusion about the report should be presented.
IV. References:
You should use Harvard referencing system. All references should be cited in the
text appropriately.
Oral Presentation:
You will present their work using PowerPoint slides in Week 12 of the term (01 May 2020).
Each presentation last no more than 10 minutes following 5 minutes for questions and
answers.
The presentation will summarize your report including the key findings in the assignment.
You should pay attention to pros and cons of each products, your selection providing appropriate
justification, and your final multimedia security system design.
Marking Scheme:
The contributions of report and presentation to the final mark of this assignment are 80% and 20%,
respectively. Marking breakdown for the presentations are as follows:
Report:
Element Mark Allocation
Introduction 5%
Evaluation of the Lab Results 25%
Watermarking Method 30%
Overall Evaluation 10%
Conclusion 5%
Structure, Proof Reading and Referencing 5%
Total 80%
Presentation:
Element Mark Allocation
Confidence 3%
Conciseness and clarity of presentation 3%
Explanations 8%
Ability to answer questions fully 6%
Total 20%

4
 The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics
6CC543 Multimedia Security

Assessment Criteria - Report

Criteria < 40 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70 - 79 > 80
Introduction (5%) Introduction is not Introduction is provided Introduction is provided Introduction have some Introduction explains the Introduction explains the
provided, or it is not but does not cover the but with weak links to the links to the content but fail content of the report well. content of the report well
relevant. essence of the report. content of the report. to explain why it was as well as define the
prepared. problem covered the
assignment.
Evaluation of the Lab Evaluation is not provided Few questions are Some questions are Some questions are All questions are answered All questions are answered
Results (25%) OR not correct at all. answered correctly. answered correctly but lack answered correctly with correctly but lack of some correctly with appropriate
of consistency, appropriate insights, consistency, explanations insights, absolute
explanations and insights consistency and and insights on the consistency and good
on the answers. explanations. answers. explanations.
Watermarking Method The method is not provided Appropriate method is Some coverage of the Good coverage of the Good coverage of the Very good coverage of the
(30%) or is not an appropriate provided. Basic coverage method. Technical content method. Technical content method. Technical content method. Technical content
watermarking method for of the method. Embedding is somewhat logically is accurate and logical. is accurate. Embedding and is accurate and
copyright protection. and extracting watermark is presented and elaborated in Embedding and extracting extracting watermark is professionally articulated.
explained but not clearly. a simple but precise way. watermark is explained explained in an excellent Embedding and extracting
Technical content is not Embedding and extracting properly. Critical way. Critical evaluation for watermark is explained in
logically presented. Critical watermark is somewhat evaluation for the attacks is the attacks is provided. No an excellent way. Critical
evaluation for attacks is explained. Critical provided briefly. Few misunderstandings / errors. evaluation for the attacks is
missing. Some evaluation for attacks is misunderstandings / errors. provided in a
misunderstandings / errors, missing. Some comprehensive way. No
method is not significant misunderstandings / errors, misunderstandings / errors.
enough. not significant.
Overall Evaluation (10%) Evaluation is not provided Methods are compared All attacks are considered Methods are compared and Methods are compared and Methods are compared and
or is not relevant. somewhat but not all in the evaluation but not analysed in terms of all analysed in terms of all analysed in terms of all
attacks are considered. No insightful way. Final attacks but not insightful attacks. Some insights and attacks. Appropriate
final conclusion on the conclusion is drawn but not way. Final conclusion is comments are provided. insights and comments are
watermarking method for based on the evaluation and drawn based on the Final conclusion is drawn provided. Final conclusion
DRM. not justified. evaluation but not justified. based on the evaluation and is drawn based on the
justified somewhat. evaluation and justified
thoroughly.
Conclusion (5%) No conclusion or the Some conclusions are Logical and valid Some appropriate, valid All conclusions are drawn Conclusions summarizes
conclusion is not relevant. drawn but not valid. conclusions are provided and insightful conclusions and they are insightful. all aspects covered in the
but not insightful and not are drawn. report exceptionally well
covered all aspects of the and insightful ways.
report.
Structure, Proof Reading Unclear structure to report. Some structure to report. Clear structure to report. Very clear structure to Well-written report, Well-formulated structure
and Referencing (5%) Many spelling mistakes in Numerous spelling Some spelling errors. Main report. Few spelling showing good skills in to report. No spelling
each paragraph. Writing mistakes. Some text may sources cited but not all of mistakes. Sentences of creativity and good design. mistakes. Writing style
style unclear. No sources be verbose. Few sources them. Some problems in appropriate length and Sentences of appropriate clear and informative

5
 The School of Electronics, Computing and Mathematics
6CC543 Multimedia Security

Assessment Criteria – Oral Presentation

Criteria < 40 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70 - 79 > 80

Confidence (3%) Poor intonation with Intonation is somehow Intonation is generally Clear intonation and Clear intonation with Very clear intonation with
tendency to mumble. adequate. Volume and adequate. Volume and generally appropriate appropriate and adaptive appropriate and adaptive
Inaudible volume with pace either too fast or too pace extremely variable, volume and pace. Minor volume and pace of volume and pace of
pace of delivery either too slow, but efforts made to efforts made to instances of incorrect delivery evident for the delivery evident
fast or too slow. No control/improve over time. control/improve over time. volume or pace being majority of the exercise. throughout. Clear eye
corrective improvement Moderate eye contact. No Reasonable eye contact. adopted. Good eye contact. Very good eye contact and contact appropriate with
over time. Little or no eye apparent improvement No apparent improvement Some instances of generally appropriate to all all parties maintained and
contact. Tendency to look observed over the observed over the incorrect eye contact but parties. Minor instances of observed throughout. Very
down or deliberately away duration. Generally duration. Generally minor improvement incorrect eye contact but confident from the start
from the subject nervous but no nervous but moderately observed. Slightly nervous clear improvement with no obvious signs of
throughout. Sustained improvement with time. improves with time. at the start but becomes observed. Reasonably nerves. Maintains a high
nervousness with little or Indication of Moderate indication of confident with time. Very confident from the start level of confidence
no confidence overconfidence bordering overconfidence bordering minor indication of with minor signs of nerves. throughout
arrogance. arrogance. overconfidence but no Maintains a moderate level
suggestion of arrogance. of confidence.
Conciseness and clarity Very poor presentation Too much text with some The text and visual content Good balance between text Very concise and clear Very high quality
of presentation (3%) with lack of clarity. Too visual content. The balance is not good and visual content. The presentation with minor presentation. Products
many text and no visual products are not presented enough. The clarity of the products and their pros and problems. The products presented in an excellent
appeals are presented. clearly. The decision on presentation is moderate. cons are presented clearly are explained clearly. The way. The final decision is
which product is not clear. The final decision is not but the final decision is not final decision is somewhat thoroughly justified.
justified. justified. justified.
Explanations (8%) Poor or inaccurate with Not adequate. Additional Generally adequate. Some Mostly clear and relevant. Clear and relevant Very clear and relevant
limited understanding of clarity required with additional clarity required Good understanding of the throughout. Very good throughout. Excellent
the subject matter. explanations given. with explanations given. subject matter. understanding of the understanding of the
Insufficiently lay. subject matter. subject.
Ability to answer Conveys incorrect Manages to give few Manages to give some Conveys correct Conveys correct Always conveys correct
questions fully (6%) information or Language correct information some correct information some information with an information with a very information with a high
mostly colloquial rather of the time with some use of the time with some use appropriate level of good level of language. A level of appropriate
than scientific. Generally a of appropriate language. of appropriate language. scientific language. A high level of language. A very high
low level of Low level of Moderate level of moderate to high level of professionalism. level of professionalism
professionalism. professionalism. professionalism. professionalism. demonstrated throughout.