Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

39
Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012

Transcript of Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Page 1: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Anonymous Communications

Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan

CSE 4471: Information Security

Autumn 2012

Page 2: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications

• Final Remarks

Page 3: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Overview: Anonymous Communications

• Network communications among parties concealing parties’ identity, existence of communications– Applications: whistleblowing, privacy-preserving

free expression, voting in elections, etc.

– Systems: Tor [1], I2P [2], Anonymizer [3], etc.

– Practice: Users’ communications cloaked by partitioning into application-layer chunks, relayed among users in system [4]

Page 4: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Case Study: How Tor Works

Source: [1]

Page 5: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications– Motivation

– Flow marking traceback technique

– Prototyping

– Implementation and Evaluation

– Related Work

• Final Remarks

Page 6: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Motivation: Invisible Traceback (1)

• Traceback in the real world

Animal traceback Mail traceback Family traceback [5]

Page 7: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Motivation: Invisible Traceback (2)

• Internet is breeding ground for many crimes:

• Criminal enterprises like anonymous communications…

• For such cases, law enforcement investigators need to determine parties responsible for crimes

Credit Card Fraud Sharing © Files(without permission)

Cyber-Terrorism Malware Distribution

Page 8: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Motivation: Invisible Traceback (3)

• Traceback aims to determine “whodunit”:– Origin of a packet/message– Unauthorized distributors, downloaders of © files– Evil cybercriminals communicating with each other

Evil Evil

Investigator

Page 9: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Motivation: Invisible Traceback (4)

• Critical point: investigator’s traceback activity needs to be invisible to suspects (e.g., illegal file sharers, cybercriminals)

• Without invisibility:– Suspects would cease criminal activity, do it

elsewhere, develop countermeasures to fool investigators, etc.

– Investigator would have no evidence of wrongdoing

• Traceback helps hold cybercriminals responsible for their actions

Page 10: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Challenges to Invisible Traceback (1)

• The nature of the Internet:– Large scale, loose control

– Destination oriented routing and forwarding ⟹easy to spoof source IP addresses

– Intermediate nodes record very little information

Page 11: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Challenges to Invisible Traceback (2)

• Availability of anonymous communication systems

Anonymous Communication

Sender Receiver

A

B

Human Spy Network

S to A

B to R

A to B

Page 12: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Our Focus

• Suppose a sender sends traffic through an encrypted anonymous channel. How can the investigator trace and confirm the receiver’s identity?

• Papers [4] and [6] (S&P 2007, ToN 2012)

ReceiverSender

Anonymous Channel

Page 13: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications– Motivation

– Flow marking traceback technique

– Prototyping

– Implementation and Evaluation

– Related Work

• Final Remarks

Page 14: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

An Intuitive Solution

• Packet marking: mark certain packets

Sender

AnonymousNetwork

Receiver

• However, packets are encrypted in anonymous communication systems– Carelessly marked packets fail decryption ⟹

visible to the attacker!

Page 15: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Our Solution

• Flow marking– Change traffic flow rates

– Traffic rate changes represent a “mark,” i.e., special secret code

AnonymousChannel

Investigator knows that Sender communicates with Receiver!

Investigator

Sender AnonymousNetwork

Interferer

Receiver

Sniffer

Page 16: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Key Differences Between Flow and Packet Marking

• Packet marking– Mark embedded in packets – Packet content is changed– It is very difficult, if impossible, to hide such

changes when packets are encrypted

• Flow marking– Mark is embedded in flow rate changes– No packet content is changed– It is feasible to hide flow rate changes in the

Internet, typically with dynamic traffic

Page 17: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Questions About Flow Marking

• A “detail” question:– How is a mark embedded into flow rate changes?

• Two “big picture” questions:– How do we make the traffic rate changes invisible

to cybercriminals?

– How do we make the traffic changes robust to burst traffic interference in the Internet?

Page 18: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Embedding Mark Into Flow Rate Changes

• Mark decides flow rate changes– Key to flow rate changes’ invisibility and

robustness: choose an appropriate mark

– Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS)

-1111 1 -1 -1 Mark

Flow

Page 19: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Basic Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS)

• A pseudo-noise (PN) code is used for spreading a signal and despreading a spread signal

DespreadingSpreading

PN Code

Original Signal

tb

ct

dt

PN Code

cr

Recovered Signal

noisychannel

Interferer Sniffer

rb dr

Page 20: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Example: Spreading and Despreading• Signal • PN code (i.e. DSSS code) •

– One symbol is “represented” by 7 chips– PN code is random; not visible in time or frequency domains

• tb is the mark!• Despreading is the reverse process of spreading

+1

–1dt t

ct

+1

–1

Tc (chip)

t

NcTc

t

tb

Mark

Page 21: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Invisibility of Flow Marking

• Marks show a white noise-like pattern in both time, frequency domains

• Mark amplitude can be very small

• As suspects don’t know the code, it’s very hard for them to recognize marks

Page 22: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Accuracy of Flow Marking Recognition

• Spreading/despreading processes make the mark immune to burst interference introduced by Internet background traffic

+1

–1dt t

ct

+1

–1

Tc (chip)

t

tb

Mark

Page 23: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications– Motivation

– Flow marking traceback technique

– Prototyping

– Implementation and Evaluation

– Related Work

• Final Remarks

Page 24: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

A Prototype System

ReceiverSender

SnifferInterferer

AnonymousNetwork

Signal Modulator

Flow Modulator Flow Demodulator

Signal Modulator

Recovered Signal

Page 25: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Embedding Signal into Traffic at Interferer

1. Choose a random signalof length n: (1 -1)

2. Signal modulator: obtain the spread signal

3. Flow modulator: modulate a target traffic flow by appropriate interference• Bit 1: without interference• Bit –1: with interference

PN Code

Signal

FlowModulator

Internet

spread signal + noise

Signal Modulator

Page 26: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Recovering Signal at Sniffer1. Flow demodulator:

• Sniff target traffic• Sample target traffic to derive traffic

rate time series• Use high-pass filter to remove direct

component by Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)

2. Signal demodulator: • Despreading by the PN code• Use low-pass filter to remove high-

frequency noise

3. Decision rule:• Recovered signal == Original signal?

PN Code

Decision Rule

spread signal + noise

High-pass Filter

Low-pass Filter

Flow Demodulator

Signal Demodulator

Page 27: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Analytical Results

• 1 bit signal detection rate: probability that we recognize 1 signal bit if we know when the signal appears

where erfc( ) is complementary error function,⋅

Nc is PN code length

• n-bit signal detection rate

• SNR influences accuracy as well as invisibility

A

Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR)

Page 28: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications– Motivation

– Flow marking traceback technique

– Prototyping

– Implementation and Evaluation

– Related Work

• Final Remarks

Page 29: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Real World Experimental Setup

• The flow modulator at the interferer uses denial of service attack in wired networks

Page 30: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Evaluation Setup

Interfer

er

SnifferSender

Receiver

Page 31: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Traceback Invisibility

• Overlapping traffic rate curves for traffic without marks in time and frequency domains

Page 32: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Traceback Accuracy

Page 33: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Transformation into a Real-World Tool

• Remaining issues– Not totally invisible

– Not accurate to low rate traffic

– Robustness

• Applied to different scenarios– One-to-one group ⟹• Orthogonal codes parallel flow marking⟹

–Wireless/wired networks

Page 34: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications– Motivation

– Flow marking traceback technique

– Prototyping

– Implementation and Evaluation

– Related Work

• Final Remarks

Page 35: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Related Work

• IP packet marking based traceback (UC Berkeley, Purdue U.) [7, 8]– Each router on path adds its IP address to packet; victim reads path from packet

– Con: requires extra space in packet; requires network infrastructure involvement

• Packet inter-arrival time based traceback (NCSU, George Mason U.) [9, 10]– Adjusts packet inter-arrival time conveying information

– Pro: fewer packets

– Con: sensitive to interference; needs more controlled network segments

• Correlation based traceback (UT Arlington, U. of Cambridge) [11, 12]– Correlates traffic at different locations (passively or actively)

– Pro: passive, no target traffic interference (good secrecy)

– Con: needs threshold to determine whether traffic at different locations is related

Page 36: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Outline

• Overview of Anonymous Communications

• Invisible Traceback over Anonymous Communications

• Final Remarks

Page 37: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

Final Remarks

• Anonymous communication systems useful, but can be abused by cybercriminals

• Invisible traceback: important, hard problem

• We proposed novel traceback technique based on flow marking with spread spectrum

• We prototyped a system based on this technique

• Technique has strong potential for development as a real-world tool

Page 38: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

References (1)1. Tor Project, “Tor: Anonymity Online,” http://torproject.org/about/overview.html.en

2. “I2P Anonymous Network,” http://www.i2p2.de/

3. Anonymizer, Inc., http://www.anonymizer.com

4. Z. Ling, J. Luo, W. Yu, X. Fu, D. Xuan, and W. Jia, “A New Cell-Counting-Based Attack Against Tor,” ACM/IEEE Trans. on Networking (ToN), vol. 20, no. 4, Aug. 2012, pp. 1245–1261.

5. http://www.englishexercises.org/makeagame/viewgame.asp?id=453

6. W. Yu, X. Fu, S. Graham, D. Xuan, and W. Zhao, “DSSS-Based Flow Marking Technique for Invisible Traceback,” Proc. IEEE Symp. on Security and Privacy (S&P), 2007, pp. 18–31.

7. D. X. Song and A. Perrig, “Advanced and authenticated marking schemes for IP traceback”, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2001

8. K. Park and H. Lee, “On the Effectiveness of Probabilistic Packet Marking for IP Traceback under Denial of Service Attack”, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2001.

9. X. Wang, S. Chen, and S. Jajodia, “Tracking anonymous peer-to-peer voip calls on the internet,” in Proc. ACM Conf. on Computer Communications Security (CCS), 2005.

10. P. Peng, P. Ning, and D. S. Reeves, “On the secrecy of timing-based active watermarking trace-back techniques,” in Proc. IEEE Symp. on Security and Privacy (S&P), 2006.

Page 39: Anonymous Communications Adam C. Champion and Dong Xuan CSE 4471: Information Security Autumn 2012.

References (2)

11. Y. Zhu, X. Fu, B. Graham, R. Bettati, and W. Zhao, “On flow correlation attacks and countermeasures in mix networks,” in Proc. Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PET), 2004.

12. B. N. Levine, M. Reiter, C. Wang, and M. Wright, “Timing analysis in low-latency mix systems,” in Proc. Int’l. Conf. on Financial Cryptography, 2004.