Computer-based steganography is destined to failure in the same way DRM is destined to failure. If a computer program can interpret the data, someone else can r

Computer-based steganography is destined to failure in the same way DRM is destined to failure. If a computer program can interpret the data, someone else can reverse engineer the formats until the solution is found. It might slow something down slightly, but is not likely to be effective alone. The reason computers and networks are useful to us is because they can instantaneously create perfect copies of long strings of numbers, which programs interpret to have specific meanings. If we have a use case where perfect, rapid proliferation may be problematic, computational digitization should be considered a suspect mechanism for the implementation of that use case. tl;dr: implement [at least most of] your steganography the old-fashioned way.