skip to main content
10.1145/3319535.3363189acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Geneva: Evolving Censorship Evasion Strategies

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 November 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Researchers and censoring regimes have long engaged in a cat-and-mouse game, leading to increasingly sophisticated Internet-scale censorship techniques and methods to evade them. In this paper, we take a drastic departure from the previously manual evade-detect cycle by developing techniques to automate the discovery of censorship evasion strategies. We present Geneva, a novel genetic algorithm that evolves packet-manipulation-based censorship evasion strategies against nation-state level censors. Geneva composes, mutates, and evolves sophisticated strategies out of four basic packet manipulation primitives (drop, tamper headers, duplicate, and fragment). With experiments performed both in-lab and against several real censors (in China, India, and Kazakhstan), we demonstrate that Geneva is able to quickly and independently re-derive most strategies from prior work, and derive novel subspecies and altogether new species of packet manipulation strategies. Moreover, Geneva discovers successful strategies that prior work posited were not effective, and evolves extinct strategies into newly working variants. We analyze the novel strategies Geneva creates to infer previously unknown behavior in censors. Geneva is a first step towards automating censorship evasion; to this end, we have made our code and data publicly available.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p2199-bock.webm

webm

94.1 MB

References

  1. Claudio Agosti and Giovanni Pellerano. 2011. SniffJoke: transparent TCP connection scrambler. https://github.com/vecna/sniffjoke. (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Simurgh Aryan, Homa Aryan, and J. Alex Halderman. 2013. Internet Censorship in Iran: A First Look. In USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Sam Burnett and Nick Feamster. 2015. Encore: Lightweight Measurement of Web Censorship with Cross-Origin Requests. In ACM SIGCOMM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Richard Clayton, Steven J. Murdoch, and Robert N. M. Watson. 2006. Ignoring the Great Firewall of China. In Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Lawrence Davis. 1991. Handbook of genetic algorithms .CUMINCAD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Roger Dingledine, Nick Mathewson, and Paul Syverson. 2004. Tor: The Second-Generation Onion Router. In USENIX Security Symposium.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Daniel Ellard, Christine Jones, Victoria Manfredi, W. Timothy Strayer, Bishal Thapa, Megan Van Welie, and Alden Jackson. 2015. Rebound: Decoy routing on asymmetric routes via error messages. In IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Roya Ensafi, David Fifield, Philipp Winter, Nick Feamster, Nicholas Weaver, and Vern Paxson. 2015. Examining How the Great Firewall Discovers Hidden Circumvention Servers. In ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. David Fifield. 2017. Threat modeling and circumvention of Internet censorship. In PhD thesis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. David Fifield, Nate Hardison, Jonathan Ellithorpe, Emily Stark, Dan Boneh, Roger Dingledine, and Phil Porras. 2012. Evading Censorship with Browser-Based Proxies. Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. David Fifield, Chang Lan, Rod Hynes, Percy Wegmann, and Vern Paxson. 2015. Blocking-resistant communication through domain fronting. In Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Félix-Antoine Fortin, Franccois-Michel De Rainville, Marc-André Gardner, Marc Parizeau, and Christian Gagné. 2012. DEAP: Evolutionary Algorithms Made Easy. Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 13 (July 2012), 2171--2175.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Li Haifeng, Wang Shaolei, Zhang Bin, Shuai Bo, and Tang Chaojing. 2015. Network protocol security testing based on fuzz. International Conference on Computer Science and Network Technology (ICCSNT).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Mark Handley, Vern Paxson, and Christian Kreibich. 2001. Network Intrusion Detection: Evasion, Traffic Normalization, and End-To-End Protocol Semantics. In USENIX Security Symposium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Amirr Houmansadr, Chad Brubaker, and Vitaly Shmatikov. 2013. The Parrot is Dead: Observing Unobservable Network Communications. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Amir Houmansadr, Thomas Riedl, Nikita Borisov, and Andrew Singer. 2012. IP over Voice-over-IP for censorship circumvention. In arXiv preprint arXiv:1207.2683.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Amir Housmandr, Giang T. K. Ngyuen, Matthew Caesar, and Nikita Borisov. 2011. Cirripede: Circumvention Infrastructure using Router Redirection with Plausible Deniability. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Sheharbano Khattak, Mobin Javed, Philip D. Anderson, and Vern Paxson. 2013. Towards Illuminating a Censorship Monitor's Model to Facilitate Evasion. In USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. George T. Klees, Andrew Ruef, Benjamin Cooper, Shiyi Wei, and Michael Hicks. 2018. Evaluating Fuzz Testing. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Eddie Kohler, Robert Morris, Benjie Chen, John Jannotti, and M Frans Kaashoek. 2000. The Click modular router. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, Vol. 18, 3 (2000), 263--297.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Dave Levin, Youndo Lee, Luke Valenta, Zhihao Li, Victoria Lai, Cristian Lumenzanu, Neil Spring, and Bobby Bhattacharjee. 2015. Alibi Routing. In ACM SIGCOMM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhihao Li, Stephen Herwig, and Dave Levin. 2017. DeTor: Provably Avoiding Geographic Regions in Tor. In USENIX Security Symposium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Moxie Marlinspike. 2017. Doodles, stickers, and censorship circumvention for Signal Android. https://signal.org/blog/doodles-stickers-censorship/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Dirk Merkel. 2014. Docker: Lightweight Linux Containers for Consistent Development and Deployment. Linux Journal, Vol. 239, 2 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Hooman Mohajeri Moghaddam, Baiyu Li, Mohammad Derakhshani, and Ian Goldberg. 2012. SkypeMorph: Protocol Obfuscation for Tor Bridges. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Zubair Nabi. 2013. The Anatomy of Web Censorship in Pakistan. In USENIX Workshop on Free and Open Communications on the Internet (FOCI).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomas H. Ptacek and Timothy N. Newsham. 1998. Insertion, Evasion, and Denial of Service: Eluding Network Intrusion Detection. In Secure Networks, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Ram Sundara Raman, Leonid Evdokimov, Eric Wustrow, Alex Halderman, and Roya Ensafi. 2019. Kazakhstan's HTTPS Interception. https://censoredplanet.org/kazakhstan. (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Fangfan Liand Abbas Razaghpanah, Arash Molavi Kakhki, Arian Akhavan Niaki, David Choffnes, Phillipa Gill, and Alan Mislove. 2017. lib$cdot$erate, (n): A library for exposing (traffic-classification) rules and avoiding them efficiently. In ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Reporters Without Borders. 2013. Enemies of the Internet 2013 Report. https://surveillance.rsf.org/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/03/enemies-of-the-internet_2013.pdf. (March 2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Scott Michael Seal. 2016. Optimizing Web Application Fuzzing with Genetic Algorithms and Language Theory. In Master of Science Thesis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Signal. 2017. Egypt keeps trying to block Signal, inadvertently blocking all of Google, and having to stop as a result. We'll also expand domain fronts. https://twitter.com/signalapp/status/817062093094604800. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Spandan Veggalam, Sanjay Rawat, Istvan Haller, and Herbert Bos. 2016. IFuzzer: An Evolutionary Interpreter Fuzzer using Genetic Programming. In European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Paul Vines and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2015. Rook: Using Video Games as a Low-Bandwidth Censorship Resistant Communication Platform. In Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Qiyan Wang, Xun Gong, Giang T. K. Nguyen, Amir Houmansadr, and Nikita Borisov. 2012. CensorSpoofer: Asymmetric Communication Using IP Spoofing for Censorship-Resistant Web Browsing. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Zhongjie Wang, Yue Cao, Zhiyun Qian, Chengyu Song, and Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy. 2017. Your State is Not Mine: A Closer Look at Evading Stateful Internet Censorship. In ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Zachary Weinberg, Jeffrey Wang, Vinod Yegneswaran, Linda Briesemeister, Steven Cheung, Frank Wang, and Dan Boneh. 2012. StegoTorus: A Camouflage Proxy for the Tor Anonymity System. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Brandon Wiley. [n. d.]. Dust: A Blocking-Resistant Internet Transport Protocol. http://blanu.net/Dust.pdf. ([n. d.]).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Philipp Winter. 2012. brdgrd (Bridge Guard). https://github.com/NullHypothesis/brdgrd. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Philipp Winter and Jedidiah R. Crandall. 2012. The Great Firewall of China: How It Blocks Tor and Why It Is Hard to Pinpoint. ;login:, Vol. 37, 6 (2012), 42--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Eric Wustrow, Colleen M. Swanson, and J. Alex Halderman. 2014. TapDance: End-to-Middle Anticensorship without Flow Blocking. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Eric Wustrow, Scott Wolchok, Ian Goldberg, and J. Alex Halderman. 2011. Telex: Anticensorship in the Network Infrastructure. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Xueyang Xu, Morley Mao, and J. Alex Halderman. 2011. Internet Censorship in China: Where Does the Filtering Occur?. In Passive and Active Network Measurement Workshop (PAM).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Tarun Kumar Yadav, Akshat Sinha, Devashish Gosain, Piyush Kumar Sharma, and Sambuddho Chakravarty. 2018. Where The Light Gets In: Analyzing Web Censorship Mechanisms in India. In ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Wenxuan Zhou, Amir Houmansadr, Matthew Caesar, and Nikita Borisov. 2013. SWEET: Serving the Web by Exploiting Email Tunnels. In Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Geneva: Evolving Censorship Evasion Strategies

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CCS '19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
          November 2019
          2755 pages
          ISBN:9781450367479
          DOI:10.1145/3319535

          Copyright © 2019 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 6 November 2019

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          CCS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate149of934submissions,16%Overall Acceptance Rate1,261of6,999submissions,18%

          Upcoming Conference

          CCS '24
          ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
          October 14 - 18, 2024
          Salt Lake City , UT , USA

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader