Anonymity on the Internet - Case Study Example

Anonymity in Internet Anonymity is a major security feature for ensuring confidentiality and security for internet users. Anonymity ensures that the information exchanged through the internet cannot be traced to the internet user. Three types of Internet anonymity include full anonymity and pseudonymity. Many internet anonymity systems have some flaws which allow eavesdroppers to access personal information. Internet anonymity is offered through anonymous servers and anonymous internet users. Though anonymity is a desirable security feature, it has certain disadvantages. Anonymity can be achieved through various security protocols like Single Socket Layer (SSL) protocol, Secure Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (SHTTP) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol among others. Security protocols allow the establishment of secure channels across two communicating parties that are linked through an insecure network. Though the various protocols have many similarities, each of the security protocols has inherent strengths, weaknesses and vulnerabilities. While encryption offers some anonymity, there are certain limitations. The major challenge is the possibility of eavesdropping by local ISP or a local system administrator. The internet security protocols allow transfer of some networking information like the traffic flow route and the source-destination pair which is revealed through traffic analysis. Traffic analysis allows transmission of times data packets. The challenges associated with internet security protocols can be overcome by utilizing authentication and key agreement (AKA) protocols which provide a random-shared key that can be used to uphold confidentiality and anonymity and have less vulnerabilities. Table of contents Introduction……………………………………………………………......................................4 Section I: Anonymity in the context of internet communication: what does it imply….…..........4 Section II: Advantages and disadvantages associated with anonymity…………………………7 Section III: Network security protocols in internet anonymity………………………………….8 Section IV: Comparison between different security protocols…………………………………12 Section V: Problems/challenges of internet security protocols………………………………...13 Section VI: Proposed solutions to the challenges of internet security protocols………………14 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..15 Works Cited……………………………………………………………………………………16 Introduction In the wake of increasing dominance of internet as the preferred mode of communication, there has been a lot of interest on the use of anonymity as a means of ensuring user privacy and security. The unprotected nature of internet networks makes them vulnerable for eavesdropping by unauthorized persons. Though anonymity can exist without the internet, the increase in internet usage has made it easier for distribution of anonymous messages. The free information flow facilitated by increased internet communication poses potential security risks to individuals, businesses and government departments as well as the entire nation. As a result, various software and hardware security features have been suggested to address the issue of anonymity. This paper examines the issue of anonymity during internet use with focus on why, how, what and when anonymity should be exercised. The paper critically examines different security protocols involved in anonymity on the internet with regard to the hardware and software components involved. Additionally, the potential problems arising from anonymity and the possible solutions shall also be addressed. Section I: Anonymity in the context of internet communication: what does it imply? One of the major concerns in internet use is the extent to which their privacy shall be upheld. Most internet users do not intent that all the information received or transferred shall be traced to their identity. Ironically, the internet makes it both difficult and easier to uphold anonymity. On one hand, it can be argued that all the information exchanged through the internet except during video conferencing should be considered anonymous since the identity of the other user cannot be verified with certainty (Schwabach 13). In this case, users can send mails and participate in group chats using a fictitious identity. Conversely, it is impossible to uphold anonymity on the internet since all internet communications are recorded (Schwabach 13). Some communications especially those involving internet transactions can be matched to the exact name or the credit card details of the user while others can be traced to the IP address of the personal computer from which the information was send. The growth of databases and data mining techniques will eventually make it possible to decipher every communication transmitted through the internet by a particular user. Such information includes the websites visited by the user, the links clicked and every download or upload undertaken from the user’s personal computer. In reference to the internet, anonymity refers to the ability of a user to surf the internet without revealing their personal information like names, addresses and other personal details (Scott 31). The anonymity feature in the internet is used by various parties including whistle blowers, political dissidents, abused children and spouses unwilling to reveal their identity in order to safeguard themselves from retaliation by the aggressors. To maintain anonymity, people often post internet messages using false pseudonyms. This form of anonymity is referred as pseudonymity. Anonymity is useful for users seeking to send to send or access sensitive information through the internet since the users’ identity is revealed by the user name and address. The legitimacy of anonymity in internet communication is derived from the First Amendment which provides the right for individuals to communicate anonymously and/or pseudonymously on condition that their actions do not violate the law (Scott 32). However, the ability to express oneself on the internet without the burden of revealing one’s identity can facilitate free communication or healthy debates by allowing parties to obtain information on a sensitive issue without worrying about intimidation or embarrassment. Types of anonymity on the internet Though it is no practical to uphold complete anonymity, internet users employ various techniques to maintain anonymity. One of the means of achieving anonymity is through untraceable identify where the internet user cannot be identified through user names or pseudo-names. This renders it impossible for the person on the other end to know the identity of the internet user. Another type of anonymity is pseudonymity in which the internet user is identified using a pseudonym or a user code. Though the user identity cannot be known, it is possible to connect various communications originating from a similar pseudonym (Kizza 82). Psudonymity is the preferred type of anonymity in the context of internet use. Anonymity can also be achieved by using a pseudo address to exchange information with others (Kizza 82). This type of anonymity is common among people who communicate using anonymous news and user groups during communication. In today’s internet world, the various anonymity types are not easily achievable. This is because the software and hardware infrastructure utilized in the internet is revealing. For instance, most microprocessors and internet cards are designed with unique serial numbers which make it possible to track the internet user. Additionally, documents generated through Microsoft Office software contain certain information which can be traced back to the author while anonymous e-mail addresses can be traced to the real owners by tracing the IP address. Many systems that guarantee anonymity on the internet have also been found to have some flaws which make it possible for eavesdroppers to access personal information (Kizza 83). Internet anonymity channels The internet offers two channels of achieving anonymity. (a) Anonymity servers Advances in hardware and software technologies have facilitated anonymity through full anonymity or pseudonymous servers. In full anonymity servers, no user identity information is send through packet headers while in pseudonymous servers, a pseudonym is attached to the packet headers upholding the real identity while allowing exchange of information packets by the pseudonym to the server (Kizza 83). In anonymous servers, anonymity is achieved through data encryption techniques. (b) Anonymous internet users Another channel through which internet anonymity is achieved is though use of pseudonyms using various internet services like chat rooms and bulleting boards. In this way, users can post sensitive information to user groups among other recipients. In such cases, anonymity is achieved by using various data transmission protocols like Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP) and Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) which allow users to send information to servers with arbitrary field information (Kizza 83). Section II: Advantages and disadvantages associated with anonymity Advantages of anonymity (a) It can be used as a means of checking unhealthy actions like abuse of office and corruption activities by hiding the identity of whistle blowers. (b) Anonymity is important in matters involving national security as it allows detectives to collect information that is crucial to a country’s security. (c)Anonymity can also be beneficial in maintaining certain relationships and security of individuals against retaliation from aggressors. Disadvantages of anonymity (a) Anonymity can be misused by criminals and fraudsters to extort money from unsuspecting victims. (b) Anonymity can limit the ability to solve disputes which could otherwise be solved by revealing the necessary information. Section III: Network security protocols in internet anonymity Anonymity can be achieved using various security protocols. Protocol suites like SSL, TLS and IPSec among others allow the establishment of secure channels across two communicating parties that are linked through an insecure network (Kotenko 26). (a) Single Socket Layer (SSL) protocol The SSL is a type of interne protocol that facilitates secure information exchange between a web server and a web user by providing authentication and confidentiality security features (Kahate 273). The SSL offers a secure conduit between the web user and the server and is supported by all web browsers. SSL is available in three different versions; 2, 3 and 3.1 with the 3 version being the most popular (Kahate 273). Within the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) or Internet Protocol (IP), SSL can be conceptualized as an extra layer in the TCP/IP suite located between the transport and the application layers (Kahate 273). The SSL protocol consists of four phases namely; establishment of security capability phase, server authentication and key exchange phase, client authentication and key exchange phase as well as the finish phase (Kahate 275). The security capabilities establishment phase of SSL is initiated by a message from the client to server which consists of the version, random, session id, cipher suite and compression method parameters (276). The version parameter serves to identify the highest SSL version supported by the client. The random parameter facilitates actual communication between the server and client which takes place through a 32-bit data time field and the 28-byte random number field generated within the client computer (Kahate 276).The session id parameter acts as a variable session identifier which signifies the existence of a connection between the client and the server and allows the user to update the update the parameters (Kahate 276). The cipher suite contains the cryptographic algorithms supported by the client while the compression method field contains the compression algorithms (Kahate 276). The Server Authentication and Key Exchange phase of the SSL is initiated by the server in which all the messages are solely sent by the server and exclusively received by the client. The steps involved in this phase include the sending of the server’s digital certificate, the server key exchange which occurs in absence of a server certificate, the certificate request step in which the server requests the client’s authentication through a certificate (Kahate 276). The final step is termed the “server hello done” in which the server sends a message to the client giving indication to verify the certificates to determine whether they are acceptable and waits for the client’s response (Kahate 277). The Client Authentication and Key Exchange SSL phase is initiated by the client where all the messages are sent by the client to the server which serves as the sole recipient. The steps involved in this phase are certificate, certificates verify and the client key exchange steps (Kahate 277). The certificate step occurs where the client’s digital certificate had not been earlier requested by the server. The client key exchange step allows exchange of information from the client to the server while the certificates verify step occurs where client authentication had been demanded by the server (Kotenko 26). The finish phase initiated by the client and finished by the server is the last phase in SSL. The finish phase has four steps; change cipher specs, finish, change cipher specs and finished steps (Kahate 277).The change cipher specs and finish steps are send by the client while the change cipher specs and the finished steps are responses from the server. Advantages of SSL protocol The SSL allows execution of an alert protocol whenever an error is detected from the client or server’s end. Whenever any of the parties detect an error, an alert message is send to the other after which both parties instantly close the SSL if the error is fatal. Additionally, the secrets and keys as well as the session identifiers associated with the connection are destroyed. In case of non-severe errors, the connection is not terminated and the error is handles by the parties. Vulnerabilities of buffer overflow on SSL The buffer overflow in SSL protocols consists of four vulnerabilities. One of the vulnerability areas is key exchange on the SSL Version 2 in which the server’s denial of service (DNS) or malicious code execution can be prompted through sending of an oversized master key by a client to a version 2 server (Kahate 283).The second vulnerability is present in the Version 3 handshake in which a malicious server may send a malformed session ID hence executing a code on an OpenSSL (Kahate 283). The third vulnerability exists in Kerberos authentication enabled Version 3 OpenSSL servers in which an oversized master key can be send to a Kerberos SSL server by a malicious client (Kahate 284). The last vulnerability exists on the 64-bit operating systems where the size of some buffers used for storage of ASCII representations is smaller than desired. One of the limitations of the SSL protocol is its complexity and time consuming nature since it utilizes asymmetric key cryptography (Kahate 283). In some cases, the server and client are forced to reuse a previous SSL connection instead of creating a new connection. Another limitation with SSL is the possibility of a buffer overflow attack which occurs whenever the process attempts to store data that exceeds the buffer’s capacity (Kahate 283). A buffer overflow may corrupt or overwrite the data contained in the adjacent buffers. A buffer overflow attack can ultimately cause damage to user files, compromising of confidential informant or change of stored data. (b)Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol The TLS protocol is an initiative aimed at achieving an internet standardized SSL version. In order to standardize the SSL, Netscape transferred the SSL protocol to the IETF. The underlying principles and the implementation for the TLS protocol is very similar o that of the SSL except for a few differences. (c) Secure Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (SHTTP) The SHTTP consists of various security mechanisms aimed at offering protection to interne traffic like data entry forms and internet transactions (Kahate 284). There is a large similarity between the SHTTP services and those offered by SSL. SHTTP supports encryption and authentication of traffic between the server and the client whose signature formats are derived from the PEM protocol. Section IV: Comparison between different security protocols Differences between the SSL and TLS The SSL uses the 3.0 version while the TLS is based on the 1.0 version. In terms of cipher suite, SSL supports the Fortezza algorithm while the TLS does not. The TLS utilizes a pseudorandom function to generate a master cryptography different from that of SSL. During the execution of the alert protocol in TLS, the No Certificate message is deleted followed by addition of the Decryption Failed, Unknown CA, record Overflow Access Denied, Internal Error, Export Restriction, Decode Error, Protocol Version and Insufficient Security messages (Kahate 284). The TLS uses the HMAC record protocol as opposed to the SSL which uses the MAC record protocol. Differences between SHTTP and SSL While SHTTP operates at the application layer in close relationship with the HTTP, SSL is operates between the transport and the application layers (Kahate 284). Another difference between the two is that SHTTP operates at the individual messages which allow it to sign and encrypt messages while SSL does not distinguish between varying messages (Kahate 285). Instead, SSL is only concerned with connecting the client and the server irrespective of the exchanges messages. Additionally, SHTTP can perform digital signatures while SSL does not. Section V: Problems/challenges of internet security protocols While encryption of communication from various web servers can offer some anonymity, there are certain limitations. The major threat to internet communication through wireless networks is the possibility of eavesdropping by local ISP or local system administrator (Reiter and Rubin 1). Eavesdropping enables eavesdroppers to decipher the client and server IP addresses and the length of transmitted data as well as the time and frequency of information exchanges (Reiter and Rubin 1). Encryption does not guarantee privacy of the client against the server since web servers are able to record the clients’ IP addresses and the time and frequency of internet access (Klonowski and Kutylowski 1). The information gathered from the server can be combined with other data to invade the privacy of the client. Cryptography does not provide sufficient protection against networking information. Though cryptography offers some degree of protection against information, some networking information like the traffic flow route and the source-destination pair can be revealed through transmission times of data packets in a technology referred as traffic analysis (He, Parv, Tong and Wicker 140). Traffic analysis violates the user anonymity through unauthorized retrieval of user information. The major challenge encountered in designing a transmission schedule capable of hiding networking information lies in minimizing the network performance effects (Parvanthinathan, Ting and Tong 2770). Networks are subject to latency, medium access and stability related limitations which lead to high correlation across various transmission schedules within a route (Parvanthinathan, Ting and Tong 2770). Anonymity requires that transmission routes are not detected through correlation across transmission routes hence a trade-off exists between network performance and anonymity. Section VI: Proposed solutions to the challenges of internet security protocols As an essential security feature in internet communication, internet security protocols should be designed to minimize the challenges encountered in upholding anonymity. These challenges can be overcome by utilizing authentication and key agreement (AKA) protocols which offer communication parties with a random-shared key that can be used to uphold confidentiality (Fu, Katti and Mangipudi 259). Two cryptography-based AKA protocols; AKA protocol with user anonymity and AKA protocol with user and server anonymity have been suggested by Fu, Katti and Mangipudi (259). The security services considered in designing the AKA protocols include the following; Mutual authentication ensures both communication parties that the message is from the intended source and is not tempered with, the key agreement ensures an agreement between the parties regarding a random shared session-key which exists independently of previous communications, the transmitted messages are protected by confidentiality against eavesdropping, anonymity ensures that no other party apart from the intended parties can decipher the communicating parties and that non-repudiation guards the communicating parties against denying their actions after completing their communication (Fu, Katti and Mangipudi 262). Whereas the proposed AKA protocols are not immune to attacks, they are designed to meet the following performance requirements; minimum number of exchanged messages, low communication and computation overhead as well as possibility of pre-computations aimed at reducing the timings for protocol execution (Fu, Katti and Mangipudi 262). Strengths of the proposed protocols The major advantage of the proposed AKA protocols is their ability to preserve anonymity which is a key security feature. The second advantage is that they exploit the capability differences between resource limited clients and the resource abundant servers which make them suitable for wireless applications (Fu, Katti and Mangipudi 260). The third strength is that they are able to resist most of the known attacks. Additionally, they are better performing in terms of number of transmitted messages and bits as well as in terms of computing time (Fu, Katti and Mangipudi 260). Conclusion After examining the issue of anonymity during internet usage with focus on why, how, what and when anonymity should be exercised, it is apparent that anonymity is an important security feature. The various security protocols involved in anonymity on the internet like Single Socket Layer (SSL) protocol, Secure Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (SHTTP) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol have varying strengths and vulnerabilities. The major strength of the security protocols is their ability to allow the establishment of secure channels across two communicating parties that are linked through an insecure network. The major challenges associated with the internet security protocols is the possibility of eavesdropping by local ISP or a local system administrator. They also allow transfer of some networking information like the traffic flow route and the source-destination pair which is revealed through traffic analysis. These challenges can be overcome by utilizing authentication and key agreement (AKA) protocols which provide a random-shared key that upholds confidentiality and anonymity and are less vulnerable to attacks. Works cited Fu, Huirong, Katti Rajendra and Mangipudi Kumar. “Authentication and key agreement protocols preserving anonymity. International Journal of Network Security, vol. 3, no.3 (2006): 259-270. He, Ting, Parv Venkitasubramanian, Tong Lang and Wicker Stephen. “Toward an analytical approach to anonymous wireless networking”. IEEE Communications Magazine, February 2008, pp. 140-146. Kahate. Cryptography and Network Security (edn 2). New York: Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2008. Print. Klonowski, Marek and Kutylowski, Miroslaw. “Provable anonymity for network mixes”. Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science, Wroclaw University of Technology, 2001. Kotenko, Igor. Computer Network Security: 5th International Conference, on Mathematical Methods, Models, and Architectures for Computer Network Security, MMM-Acns 2010, St. Petersburg, Russia, September 8-10, 2010, Proceedings. New York: Springer, 2010. Print. Reiter, Michael and Rubin Aviel. “Crowds: anonymity for web transactions”. AT & T Labs Research, 2008, pp. 1-23. Schwabach, Aaron. Internet and the Law: Technology, Society and Compromises. London: ABC-CLIO, 2006. Scott, Michael. Internet and Technology Law Desk Reference (edn 9).New York: Aspen Publishers Online, 2009. Print. Tong, Lang and Venkitasubramanian Parvathinathan. “Throughput anonymity trade-off in wireless networks under latency constraints”. IEEE INFOCOM 2008 Proceedings, 2008, pp. 807-815. Read More