Optical Asymmetric Cryptosystem Based on Dynamic Foveated Imaging and Bidimensional Empirical Mode Decomposition
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsYu et al. proposed an optical asymmetric cryptosystem method based on dynamic foveated imaging and BEMD for information security protection in this manuscript. This is a fascinating topic with potential application value. I would suggest the authors address the following questions and concerns before publication.
1. The encryption method proposed in the paper can correspond to two methods to achieve decryption, respectively, under what circumstances is it more appropriate to utilize these two decryption methods?
2. How real-time is the decryption method used in the proposed method in the paper?
3. The method proposed in the paper uses BEMD to achieve quadratic encryption, why not use other image processing methods?
4. The proposed method employs techniques from both optics and image processing. I suggest the authors discuss its implication when applying this technique to real-world applications.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThere are some minor spelling and grammar errors in the text. Please revise and polish accordingly.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors claim a PTFT-based asymmetric cryptosystem by further introducing two digital algorithms. I could not see interesting points here. BTW, some concerns are as follows:
1, While you take the high security level of your method as an advantage, why do you also show us the robustness performance? I think they conflict with each other.
2, The introduced two algorithms, DFI and BEMD, are both digital means that have nothing to do with an optical cryptosystem, it is not encouraged.
3, Regarding the PTFT-based asymmetric cryptosystem itself, I do not think it is a real one because the private secret key is actually generated in the process encryption process, which means it is determined by the plaintext, thus it is not independent and can not be re-used.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageNo comments.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this paper, authors proposed an asymmetric cryptosystem based on dynamic foveated imaging and bidimensional empirical mode decomposition. It is innovative, but there are still some issues that need to be revised or explained.
1. Second paragraph of section 2.2 ” then extracts the phase of the complex amplitude after Fourier transform as the private key and retains the amplitude of the complex amplitude to continue to propagate. ”Unclear presentation
2. At the end of line 238, how is planintext entered into the computer?
3. No (f-j) images in figure 14
4. The paper mentions the encryption of video and the ability to select decrypted frames, but does not delve into specific application scenarios and practicality. It is suggested that the authors include more about the feasibility and advantages of the system in practical applications in the discussion section.
5. The article is slightly brief in describing the process of dynamic point-of-attention imaging and BEMD, and it is recommended that the authors provide more technical details and experimental setups to ensure the reader's understanding of the entire cryptographic process. Specific descriptions of the PTFT system and white noise image generation can also improve the reader's confidence in the scheme.
6. In section 2.3, step3 in the video to add invalid frames and spoofed frames will not lose the quality of the video, the addition of invalid frames and spoofed frames in the range of how much will not affect the original video?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish language is fine.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI am sorry that the revised one also did not answer my previous comments satisfactorily.
I have already given my detailed comments on the first version of this manuscript, However, I think the respond is not good. Actually, I rejected this paper at the first place because I don’ t think there is a chance to modify it. I would like to give two major concerns again here: 1, This work involves too many digital algorithms but not real optical processing, this makes it meaningless for an optical journal; 2, The claimed ASYMMETRIC is not a real one, the secret key is generated in the encryption process, this is also meaningless since the secret key can not be used again for a different plaintext.Indeed, there are similar works have been published here or there, but that dose not mean those works are valuable.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
None
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reply is reasonable. I recommend this paper being accepted for publication.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
