Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The electric network frequency (ENF) signal embedded in recordings made under grid-powered lighting is widely used to verify recording time and assess authenticity. Its reliability under deliberate anti-forensic manipulation, however, requires further study. This paper demonstrates a signal-processing pipeline that suppresses the original ENF component in a target video and introduces the ENF-bearing luminance component of a donor video recorded at another time. We also examine ENF injection into videos with no usable ENF trace. In eight matched experiments, the ENF re-extracted from the manipulated videos produced normalized cross-correlation values within the range observed for authentic donor videos. Frame-averaged PSNR and SSIM were used to quantify visual fidelity, and two reference-free tests examined artifacts introduced by the pipeline. A batch-boundary phase-discontinuity test was not statistically significant, whereas a notch-shoulder spectral-energy measure separated the original and manipulated videos in this small sample (AUC = 1.00). These results show that ENF substitution can mislead NCC-based timestamp matching but is not necessarily undetectable, supporting the use of complementary forensic checks when ENF evidence is evaluated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ngharamike et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: