Hidden in the Noise: Two-Stage Robust Watermarking for Images
Kasra Arabi, Benjamin Feuer, R. Teal Witter, Chinmay Hegde, Niv Cohen

TL;DR
This paper introduces a two-stage, distortion-free image watermarking method using diffusion models and Fourier patterns, achieving high robustness against forgery and removal attacks to help identify AI-generated images.
Contribution
It presents a novel two-stage watermarking framework that enhances detection efficiency and robustness, addressing vulnerabilities of previous methods.
Findings
Achieves state-of-the-art robustness to forgery attacks
Effectively detects watermarks in generated images
Maintains image quality without distortion
Abstract
As the quality of image generators continues to improve, deepfakes become a topic of considerable societal debate. Image watermarking allows responsible model owners to detect and label their AI-generated content, which can mitigate the harm. Yet, current state-of-the-art methods in image watermarking remain vulnerable to forgery and removal attacks. This vulnerability occurs in part because watermarks distort the distribution of generated images, unintentionally revealing information about the watermarking techniques. In this work, we first demonstrate a distortion-free watermarking method for images, based on a diffusion model's initial noise. However, detecting the watermark requires comparing the initial noise reconstructed for an image to all previously used initial noises. To mitigate these issues, we propose a two-stage watermarking framework for efficient detection. During…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
(1) The paper is organized by some theoretical analysis and empirical evaluations. Furthermore, the motivations and methodology are clearly stated overall. (2) The work leverages the inherent initial noise of diffusion models as a watermark without external watermarking processes that might degrade image quality. It is innovative that grouped noise patterns are used with Fourier-based group identifiers, which is effective and robust. (3) The search efficiency is heavily relied on the number o
(1) The evaluations of the proposed approach are limited, where only one diffusion model is investigated. Moreover, some experimental settings are missing. (2) Proof of Theorem 4.1 seems not entirely convincing. Although it is stated as a mathematical result, the actual evidence is more empirical rather than rigorous. For example, the paper’s results show low false positives, but the proof does not provide a probability bound for these occurrences. More details can be seen in Questions.
Strengths: 1. The two-stage framework proposed in this paper addresses the vulnerabilities of current watermarking techniques, effectively demonstrating the combination of deep learning and traditional watermarking methods. This innovation offers a fresh perspective in the watermarking field. 2. The research provides specific solutions, emphasizing the robustness of the method against various attacks. This contribution not only enhances the practical applicability of the paper but also lays a va
Weakness: 1. The research motivation is unclear. In the Abstract section, the structure could be further optimized. There is a lack of smooth logical connection between the two paragraphs of the abstract. The first paragraph primarily discusses deepfakes and the limitations of current watermarking methods, but there is no clear transition when moving to the new framework in the second paragraph. This makes it difficult for readers to understand why the new method is necessary and how it relates
originality and significance: - The method presented by the paper is able to tackle both forgery and removal attacks unlike previous works. - Shows that initial noise used by diffusion models can be a watermark and improves robustness. quality and clarity: The paper is generally well written - maintains a good flow of ideas, very few typos and explains concepts and background where necessary
1. Qualitative results only cover Watermark Detection Accuracy in Table 1 but it is important to add other detection metrics such as TP/AUC etc for a stronger evaluation and to be more convincing. - Also, no ablation on perturbation strenghts vs detection accuracy 2. Section 5.2 Watermarking non-synthetic images: Issues with this section - Quantative Evaluation - Only evaluates FID, but does not touch upon more image similarity and quality metrics of watermarked images like CLIP score, SSIM an
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques · Vehicle License Plate Recognition · Advanced Data Compression Techniques
MethodsDiffusion
