Understanding Semantic Perturbations on In-Processing Generative Image Watermarks
For researchers and practitioners deploying generative model watermarks, this work highlights the overlooked vulnerability to semantic manipulations, urging explicit robustness benchmarking.
The paper introduces a multi-stage framework to stress-test in-processing generative watermarks under semantic edits, finding that robustness drops to near zero for many methods despite high image quality, revealing a critical gap in current evaluations.
The widespread deployment of high-fidelity generative models has intensified the need for reliable mechanisms for provenance and content authentication. In-processing watermarking, embedding a signature into the generative model's synthesis procedure, has been advocated as a solution and is often reported to be robust to standard post-processing (such as geometric transforms and filtering). Yet robustness to semantic manipulations that alter high-level scene content while maintaining reasonable visual quality is not well studied or understood. We introduce a simple, multi-stage framework for systematically stress-testing in-processing generative watermarks under semantic drift. The framework utilizes off-the-shelf models for object detection, mask generation, and semantically guided inpainting or regeneration to produce controlled, meaning-altering edits with minimal perceptual degradation. Based on extensive experiments on representative schemes, we find that robustness varies significantly with the degree of semantic entanglement: methods by which watermarks remain detectable under a broad suite of conventional perturbations can fail under semantic edits, with watermark detectability in many cases dropping to near zero while image quality remains high. Overall, our results reveal a critical gap in current watermarking evaluations and suggest that watermark designs and benchmarking must explicitly account for robustness against semantic manipulation.