Towards Measuring Anonymity Claudia Diaz, Stefaan Seys, Joris - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

towards measuring anonymity
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Towards Measuring Anonymity Claudia Diaz, Stefaan Seys, Joris - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Towards Measuring Anonymity Claudia Diaz, Stefaan Seys, Joris Claessens, Bart Preneel Presented By: Chris Coakley Overview Background Topic Area Problem Research Threat and Privacy Models Results Examples


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Towards Measuring Anonymity

Claudia Diaz, Stefaan Seys, Joris Claessens, Bart Preneel Presented By: Chris Coakley

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Overview

  • Background

– Topic Area – Problem

  • Research

– Threat and Privacy Models

  • Results
  • Examples
  • Pro/Con

Pro/Con

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Background

  • Topic Area

– Anonymous routing protocols – Keeping the sender secret – Secret data is a separate problem

  • Problem

– How much anonymity does a system provide? – What does that mean, anyway?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

System Model

  • Senders
  • Recipients

Recipients

  • Mixes

A it S t th “h t” S d

  • Anonymity Set - the “honest” Senders

S M M R S M

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Threat Model

  • Attacker Properties

– Internal - External – Passive - Active – Local - Global

  • Probabilistic Attack

– With probability p, A is the sender

  • Maximum Anonymity: All senders

equally probable

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Degree of Anonymity

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture. p

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

What does it mean?

  • d = 0 - it was YOU!
  • d = 1 - it could be anyone

d 1 it could be anyone

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Example - Crowds

  • Sender submits web request to Mixes
  • With probability:

With probability:

– pf - forward to another mix 1 p make request – 1-pf - make request

  • Property Missing: Mix doesn’t try to hide

correlation of incoming and outgoing correlation of incoming and outgoing traffic

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Crowds - Attack

  • Corrupted Mixes (C Collaborators)
  • Internal Passive Local

Internal, Passive, Local

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Attack

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Attack

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor d d hi i are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a Q TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-12
SLIDE 12

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Sender’s Point of View

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Example - Onion Routing

  • Sender routes message through Mixes
  • Sender determines path

Sender determines path

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Onion Routing - Attack

  • Attack method is indeterminate
  • Somehow identifies a subset of possible

Somehow identifies a subset of possible senders S

– Each has probability 1 / S – Each has probability 1 / S

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Onion Routing - Attack

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Pros

  • Easy to see contributions to previous

work

– Precise Definition of Degree of Anonymity

  • Crowds Example is nice

Crowds Example is nice

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Cons

  • Change of Language

– Mix becomes Jondo, User – 3 becomes C+1

  • Useless Examples

p

– Anonymous Email (elided) – Onion Routing

  • Pulls numbers from anus
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Done

  • Questions?

– 42 42 – true