Digital image fraudulence: A curse to forensic odontology


Alka Dive
Geeta Karyakarte
Shubhangi Khandekar
Ashish Bodhade


In today's era of forensic investigations, hard copies of forensic data have been replaced by digital records. However, wide availability of image processing software makes digital image manipulation an easy and low-cost way to distort or conceal facts. This review article aims to understand fraudulence in the digital records in forensic odontology and the various ways to detect as well as prevent it to an appreciable extent. Types of image fraudulence, ways to detect this fraudulence, and measures to prevent it to an appreciable extent have been discussed. Knowledge about digital image fraudulence, detection, and prevention is the desperate need of the hour in today's technology-driven forensic investigations. This review article attempts to focus on this pestering issue and aid the evolving technologies driven by great needs for valid forensic technique trying to claw out their way through the malignant fraudulence rooted in today's evolving digitization.


How to Cite
Alka Dive, Geeta Karyakarte, Shubhangi Khandekar, & Ashish Bodhade. (2018). Digital image fraudulence: A curse to forensic odontology. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 10(2), 67–70.


  1. Leung C. Forensic odontology. Hong Kong Med Diary 2008;13:16‑20.
  2. Chowdhry A, Sircar K, Popli DB, Tandon A. Image manipulation: Fraudulence in digital dental records: Study and review. J Forensic Dent Sci 2014;6:31‑5.
  3. Redi JA, Taktak W, Dugelay JL. Digital image forensics: A booklet for beginners. Multimedia Tools and Applications. 2011;51:133‑62.
  4. Güneri P, Akdeniz BG. Fraudulent management of digital endodontic images. Int Endod J 2004;37:214‑20.
  5. Farid H. Exposing digital forgeries in scientific images. Int J Sci Res Publ 2006;12:122‑9.
  6. Mankar S, Gurjar P. Image forgery types and their detection : A review. Int J Adv Res Comp Sci Softw Eng 2015;5:174‑8.
  7. Gupta A, Saxena N, Vasistha S. Detecting copy move forgery using DCT. Int J Sci Res Publ 2013;3:2250‑3153.
  8. Detecting Forged (Altered) Images. Forensic Focus; 2017. Available from: http://www.file:///C:/Users/dell/Desktop/Forensic%20 odontology/Detecting%20Forged%20(Al tered)%20Images%20_%20 Forensic%20Focus%20‑%20Articles.html. [Last cited on 2018 Jan 30].
  9. Weissmann G. Science fraud: From patchwork mouse to patchwork data. FASEB J 2006;20:587‑90.
  10. Aldhous, P., & Reich, E. S. (2009). Further doubts over stem cell images. New Scientist, 203(2720).
  11. Kutter M. Petitcolas FAP fair evaluation methods for image watermarking systems. J Electron Imaging 2000;9:445‑55.
  12. Benos DJ, Vollmer SH. Generalizing on best practices in image processing: A model for promoting research integrity: Commentary on: Avoiding twisted pixels: Ethical guidelines for the appropriate use and manipulation of scientific digital images. Sci Eng Ethics 2010;16:669‑73.