Advertisement

Journal of Computer Science and Technology

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 660–671 | Cite as

Survey on Anonymity in Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Systems

  • Ren-Yi XiaoEmail author
Survey

Abstract

Although anonymizing Peer-to-Peer (P2P) networks often means extra cost in terms of transfer efficiency, many systems try to mask the identities of their users for privacy consideration. By comparison and analysis of existing approaches, we investigate the properties of unstructured P2P anonymity, and summarize current attack models on these designs. Most of these approaches are path-based, which require peers to pre-construct anonymous paths before transmission, thus suffering significant overhead and poor reliability. We also discuss the open problems in this field and propose several future research directions.

Keywords

unstructured peer-to-peer systems mutual anonymity privacy distributed system 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

11390_2008_9162_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (87 kb)
(PDF 86.6 kb)

References

  1. [1]
  2. [2]
    ISO IS 15408. 1999, http://www.commoncriteria.org.
  3. [3]
    Pfitzmann A, Hansen M. Anonymity, unlinkability, unobservability, pseudonymity, and identity management — A consolidated proposal for terminology. Technical Report, 2005.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
  5. [5]
    Stoica I, Morris R, Karger D, Kaashoek F, Balakrishnan H. Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for Internet applications. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, San Diego, California, USA, 2001, pp.149–160.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Rowstron A, Druschel P. Pastry: Scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In Proc. Middleware, Heidelberg, Germany, Nov. 2001, pp.329–350.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Zhao B Y, Huang L, Stribling J, Rhea S C, Joseph A D, Kubiatowicz J D. Tapestry: A resilient global-scale overlay for service deployment. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (JSAC), 2004, 22(1): 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Ratnasamy S, Francis P, Handley M, Karp R, Shenker S. A scalable content-addressable network. In Proc. ACM SIG-COMM, San Diego, California, USA, 2001, pp.161–172.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
  10. [10]
  11. [11]
  12. [12]
  13. [13]
    Liu Y, Xiao L, Liu X, Ni L M, Zhang X. Location awareness in unstructured peer-to-peer systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2005, 16(2): 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Liu X, Liu Y, Xiao L. Improving query response delivery quality in peer-to-peer systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2006, 17(11): 1335–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Xiao L, Liu Y, Ni L M. Improving unstructured peer-to-peer systems by adaptive connection establishment. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 2005, 54(9): 1091–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Liao X, Jin H, Liu Y, Ni L M. Scalable live streaming service based on inter-overlay optimization. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2007, 18: 1663–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Liu Y, Zhuang Z, Xiao L, Ni L M. A distributed approach to solving overlay mismatch problem. In Proc. the 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Hachioji, Tokyo, Japan, 2004, pp.132–139.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Liu Y, Xiao L, Ni L M. Building a scalable bipartite P2P overlay network. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2007, 18(9): 1296–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Wang C, Xiao L, Liu Y, Zheng P. DiCAS: An efficient distributed caching mechanism for P2P systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2006, 17(10): 1097–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Xiao L, Zhuang Z, Liu Y. Dynamic layer management in super-peer architectures. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2005, 16(11): 1078–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Chothia T, Chatzikokolakis K. A survey of anonymous peer-to-peer file-sharing. In Proc. IFIP International Symposium on Network-Centric Ubiquitous Systems (NCUS), Nagasaki, Japan, 2005, pp.744–755.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Rogers M, Bhatti S. How to disappear completely: A survey of private peer-to-peer networks. In Proc. International Workshop on Sustaining Privacy in Autonomous Collaborative Environments (SPACE), Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada, 2007.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Nambiar A, Wright M. Salsa: A structured approach to large-scale anonymity. In Proc. ACM CCS, Alexandria, VA, USA, 2006, pp.17–26.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Scarlata V, Levine B N, Shields C. Responder anonymity and anonymous peer-to-peer file sharing. In Proc. the 9th International Conference of Network Protocol (ICNP), Riverside, CA, USA, 2001, pp.272–280.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Dingledine R, Mathewson N, Syverson P. Tor: The second-generation onion router. In Proc. the 13th USENIX Security Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, 2004, pp.303–320.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Rennhard, Plattner B. Introducing MorphMix: Peer-to-peer based anonymous Internet usage with collusion detection. In Proc. ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, Washington DC, USA, 2002, pp.91–102.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Bennett K, Grothoff C. GAP — Practical anonymous networking. In Proc. Privacy Enhancing Technologies Workshop, Germany, 2003, pp.141–160.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Reiter M K, Rubin A D. Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 1998, 1(1): 66–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Xiao L, Xu Z, Zhang X. Low-cost and reliable mutual anonymity protocols in peer-to-peer networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2003, 14(9): 829–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Mislove A, Oberoi G, Post A, Reis C, Druschel P, Wallach D S. AP3: Cooperative, decentralized anonymous communication. In Proc. the 11th ACM SIGOPS European Workshop, Leuven, Belgium, 2004, Article No.30.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Freedman M, Morris R. Tarzan: A peer-to-peer anonymizing network layer. In Proc. the 9th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), Washington DC, USA, 2002, pp.193–206.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Liu D, Chi C-H, Li M. Normalizing traffic pattern with anonymity for mission critical applications. In Proc. the 37th Annual Simulation Symposium, Arlington, USA, 2004, pp.293–299.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Berthold O, Langos H. Dummy traffic against long term intersection attacks. In Proc. Privacy Enhancing Technologies Workshop (PET), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002, pp.199–203.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Dingledine R, Freedman M J, Molnar D. The free haven project: Distributed anonymous storage service. In Proc. Workshop on Design Issues in Anonymity and Unobservability, Berkeley, California, USA, 2000, pp.67–95.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Han J, Liu Y, Xiao L, Xiao R, Ni L M. A mutual anonymous peer-to-peer protocol design. In Proc. the 19th International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium (IEEE IPDPS), Denver, CA, USA, 2005, p.68.1.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Han J, Liu Y. Mutual anonymity for mobile peer-to-peer systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS). (To appear)Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    Han J, Liu Y. Rumor riding: Anonymizing unstructured peer-to-peer systems. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), Santa Barbara, California, 2006, pp.22–31.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    Serjantov A. Anonymizing censorship resistant systems. In Proc. the 1st International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002, pp.111–120.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    Waldman M, Rubin A D, Cranor L F. Publius: A robust, tamper-evident, censorship-resistant web publishing system. In Proc. the 9th USENIX Security Symposium, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2000, pp.59–72.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    Roger Dingledine. The free haven project: Design and deployment of an anonymous secure data haven [Thesis]. MIT, June 2000.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    Sherwood R, Bhattacharjee B, Srinivasan A. P5: A protocol for scalable anonymous communication. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, Oakland, California, USA, 2002, pp.58–70.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    Levine B N, Shields C. Hordes: A multicast based protocol for anonymity. Journal of Computer Security, 2002, 10(3): 213–240.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    Wang Y, Dasgupta P. Anonymous communications on the Internet. In Proc. the IASTED International Conference on Communication, Network and Information Security, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, 2005, p.499.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    Waters B R, Felten E W, Sahai A. Receiver anonymity via incomparable public keys. In Proc. the 10th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ACM CCS), Washington DC, USA, 2003, pp.112–121.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    Luo X, Qin Z, Han J, Chen H. DHT-assisted probabilistic exhaustive search in unstructured P2P networks. In Proc. the 22nd IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IEEE IPDPS), Miami, Florida, USA, 2008. (To appear)Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    Nandan A, Pau G, Salomoni P. GhostShare — Reliable and anonymous P2P video distribution. In Proc. the 1st IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GlobeCom) Workshops, Dallas, Texas, USA, 2004, pp.200–210.Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    Clarke I, Sandberg O, Wiley B, Hong T W. Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. In Proc. Workshop on Design Issues in Anonymity and Unobservability, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2000, pp.44–66.Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    Wright M K, Adler M, Levine B N, Shields C. The predecessor attack: An analysis of a threat to anonymous communications systems. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 2004, 7(4): 489–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. [49]
    Shmatikov V. Probabilistic analysis of anonymity. In Proc. the 15th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW), Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, Canada, 2002, pp.119–128.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    Zhu Y, Bettati R. Anonymity vs. information leakage in anonymity systems. In Proc. the 25th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Columbus, Ohio, USA, 2005, pp.514–524.Google Scholar
  51. [51]
    Guan Y, Fu X, Bettati R, Zhao W. A quantitative analysis of anonymous communications. IEEE Transaction on Reliability, 2004, 53(1): 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. [52]
    Levine B N, Reiter M K, Wang C, Wright M. Timing attacks in low-latency mix systems. In Proc. the 8th International Conference on Financial Cryptography, Key West, Florida, USA, 2004, pp.251–265.Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    Serjantov A, Sewell P. Passive attack analysis for connection-based anonymity systems. In Proc. European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS), Norway, 2003, pp.116–131.Google Scholar
  54. [54]
    Fu X, Graham B, Xuan D, Bettati R, Zhao W. Analytical and empirical analysis of countermeasures to traffic analysis attacks. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP), Kaohsiung, 2003, pp.483–492.Google Scholar
  55. [55]
    Fu X, Zhu Y, Graham B, Bettati R, Zhao W. On flow marking attacks in wireless anonymous communication networks. In Proc. the 25th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (IEEE ICDCS), Columbus, Ohio, USA, 2005, pp.493–503.Google Scholar
  56. [56]
    Guan Y, Li C, Xuan D, Bettati R, Zhao W. Preventing traffic analysis for real-time communication networks. In Proc. IEEE Military Communications (MILCOM), Atlantic City, NJ, USA, 1999, vol.1, pp.744–750.Google Scholar
  57. [57]
    Murdoch S J. Danezis G. Low-cost traffic analysis of Tor. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, Oakland, California, USA, 2005, pp.183–195.Google Scholar
  58. [58]
    Breslau L, Cao P, Fan L, Phillips G, Shenker S. Web caching and Zipf-like distributions: Evidence and implications. In Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, New York, USA, Vol.1, 1999, pp.126–134.Google Scholar
  59. [59]
    Lu L, Han J, Liu Y, Hu L, Huai J, Ni L M, Ma J. Pseudo trust: Zero-knowledge authentication in anonymous P2Ps. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS). (To appear)Google Scholar
  60. [60]
    Han J, Liu Y. Dubious feedback: Fair or not? In Proc. International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Information Management (P2PIM), Hong Kong, 2006, Article No.49.Google Scholar
  61. [61]
    Tan G, Jarvis S. A payment-based incentive and service differentiation scheme for peer-to-peer streaming broadcast. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2007, 19(7): 940–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. [62]
    Xiao L, Zhu Y, Xu Z, Ni L. Incentive-based decentralized scheduling for computational grids. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS). (To appear)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Natural Science Foundation of ChinaBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations