MorphIT: Morphing Packet Reports for Internet Transparency

[1] AT&T SLA. http://cpr.att.com/pdf/se/0001-0003.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

[2] CAIDA Traces. http://www.caida.org/data/.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Comcast SLA for Wholesale Dedicated Internet. https://www.comcasttechnologysolutions.com/sites/default/files/2016-09/Service%20Level%20Agreement.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Comcast vs. Netflix: Is this really about Net neutrality? https://www.cnet.com/news/comcast-vs-netflix-is-thisreally-about-net-neutrality/.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Net neutrality by country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_by_country.Search in Google Scholar

[6] Tor: Anonymity Online. https://www.torproject.org/.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Mohammad Alaggan, Mathieu Cunche, and Sébastien Gambs. Privacy-preserving Wi-Fi Analytics. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 2018(2):4–26, 2018.10.1515/popets-2018-0010Search in Google Scholar

[8] David G Andersen, Hari Balakrishnan, Nick Feamster, Teemu Koponen, Daekyeong Moon, and Scott Shenker. Accountable internet protocol (aip). In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, volume 38, pages 339–350. ACM, 2008.10.1145/1402946.1402997Search in Google Scholar

[9] Katerina Argyraki, Petros Maniatis, David Cheriton, and Scott Shenker. Providing packet obituaries. In ACM HotNets-III, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

[10] Katerina Argyraki, Petros Maniatis, Olga Irzak, Subramanian Ashish, and Scott Shenker. Loss and delay accountability for the Internet. In 2007 IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols(ICNP), pages 194–205. IEEE, 2007.10.1109/ICNP.2007.4375850Search in Google Scholar

[11] Katerina Argyraki, Petros Maniatis, and Ankit Singla. Verifiable network-performance measurements. In Proceedings of the 6th International COnference, Co-NEXT ’10, pages 1:1–1:12, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.10.1145/1921168.1921170Search in Google Scholar

[12] Boaz Barak, Sharon Goldberg, and David Xiao. Protocols and lower bounds for failure localization in the Internet. In Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, pages 341–360. Springer, 2008.10.1007/978-3-540-78967-3_20Search in Google Scholar

[13] Martin Burkhart, Mario Strasser, Dilip Many, and Xenofontas Dimitropoulos. Sepia: Privacy-preserving aggregation of multi-domain network events and statistics. In Proceedings of the 19th USENIX Conference on Security, USENIX Security’10, pages 15–15, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010. USENIX Association.Search in Google Scholar

[14] Sambuddho Chakravarty, Marco V Barbera, Georgios Portokalidis, Michalis Polychronakis, and Angelos D Keromytis. On the effectiveness of traffic analysis against anonymity networks using flow records. In International conference on passive and active network measurement, pages 247–257. Springer, 2014.10.1007/978-3-319-04918-2_24Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ruichuan Chen, Alexey Reznichenko, Paul Francis, and Johanes Gehrke. Towards statistical queries over distributed private user data. In Presented as part of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 12), pages 169–182, San Jose, CA, 2012. USENIX.Search in Google Scholar

[16] David Clark. The design philosophy of the DARPA Internet protocols. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 18(4):106–114, 1988.10.1145/52325.52336Search in Google Scholar

[17] George Danezis. The traffic analysis of continuous-time mixes. In International Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, pages 35–50. Springer, 2004.10.1007/11423409_3Search in Google Scholar

[18] Goulet David, Johnson Aaron, Kadianakis George, and Loesing Karsten. Hidden-service statistics reported by relays. Tech. rep., The Tor Project, Inc., 2015.Search in Google Scholar

[19] Cynthia Dwork, Krishnaram Kenthapadi, Frank McSherry, Ilya Mironov, and Moni Naor. Our data, ourselves: Privacy via distributed noise generation. In Advances in Cryptology (EUROCRYPT 2006), volume 4004, page 486–503, Saint Petersburg, Russia, May 2006. Springer Verlag.10.1007/11761679_29Search in Google Scholar

[20] Cynthia Dwork, Frank McSherry, Kobbi Nissim, and Adam Smith. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In Theory of Cryptography Conference, pages 265–284. Springer, 2006.10.1007/11681878_14Search in Google Scholar

[21] Cynthia Dwork, Moni Naor, Toniann Pitassi, Guy Rothblum, and Sergey Yekhanin. Pan-private streaming algorithms. In Proceedings of The First Symposium on Innovations in Computer Science (ICS 2010). Tsinghua University Press, January 2010.Search in Google Scholar

[22] Tariq Elahi, George Danezis, and Ian Goldberg. PrivEx: Private Collection of Traffic Statistics for Anonymous Communication Networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS ’14, pages 1068–1079, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.10.1145/2660267.2660280Search in Google Scholar

[23] Úlfar Erlingsson, Vasyl Pihur, and Aleksandra Korolova. Rappor: Randomized aggregatable privacy-preserving ordinal response. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS ’14, pages 1054–1067, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.10.1145/2660267.2660348Search in Google Scholar

[24] Sharon Goldberg, David Xiao, Eran Tromer, Boaz Barak, and Jennifer Rexford. Path-quality monitoring in the presence of adversaries. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, SIGMETRICS ’08, pages 193–204, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.10.1145/1375457.1375480Search in Google Scholar

[25] Amir Houmansadr and Nikita Borisov. The need for flow fingerprints to link correlated network flows. In International Symposium on Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium, pages 205–224. Springer, 2013.10.1007/978-3-642-39077-7_11Search in Google Scholar

[26] Rob Jansen and Aaron Johnson. Safely Measuring Tor. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS ’16, pages 1553–1567, New York, NY, USA, 2016. ACM.10.1145/2976749.2978310Search in Google Scholar

[27] Aaron Johnson, Chris Wacek, Rob Jansen, Micah Sherr, and Paul Syverson. Users get routed: Traffic correlation on tor by realistic adversaries. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGSAC conference on Computer & communications security, pages 337–348. ACM, 2013.10.1145/2508859.2516651Search in Google Scholar

[28] Thomas Karagiannis, Mart Molle, Michalis Faloutsos, and Andre Broido. A nonstationary Poisson view of Internet traffic. In INFOCOM 2004. Twenty-third AnnualJoint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, volume 3, pages 1558–1569. IEEE, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

[29] Stevens Le Blond, David Choffnes, Wenxuan Zhou, Peter Druschel, Hitesh Ballani, and Paul Francis. Towards efficient traffic-analysis resistant anonymity networks. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, volume 43, pages 303–314. ACM, 2013.10.1145/2534169.2486002Search in Google Scholar

[30] Frank D McSherry. Privacy integrated queries: an extensible platform for privacy-preserving data analysis. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data, pages 19–30. ACM, 2009.10.1145/1559845.1559850Search in Google Scholar

[31] Steven J Murdoch and Piotr Zieliński. Sampled traffic analysis by internet-exchange-level adversaries. In International Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, pages 167–183. Springer, 2007.10.1007/978-3-540-75551-7_11Search in Google Scholar

[32] David Naylor, Matthew K Mukerjee, and Peter Steenkiste. Balancing accountability and privacy in the network. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, volume 44, pages 75–86. ACM, 2014.10.1145/2740070.2626306Search in Google Scholar

[33] Andreas Pfitzmann and Marit Köhntopp. Anonymity, unobservability, and pseudonymity – a proposal for terminology. In Designing privacy enhancing technologies, pages 1–9. Springer, 2001.10.1007/3-540-44702-4_1Search in Google Scholar

[34] Vibhor Rastogi and Suman Nath. Differentially private aggregation of distributed time-series with transformation and encryption. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data, pages 735–746. ACM, 2010.10.1145/1807167.1807247Search in Google Scholar

[35] Vitaly Shmatikov and Ming-Hsiu Wang. Timing analysis in low-latency mix networks: Attacks and defenses. In European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, pages 18–33. Springer, 2006.10.1007/11863908_2Search in Google Scholar

[36] Charles V Wright, Scott E Coull, and Fabian Monrose. Traffic morphing: An efficient defense against statistical traffic analysis. In NDSS, volume 9, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Andrew C Yao. Protocols for secure computations. In Foundations of Computer Science, 1982. SFCS’08. 23rd Annual Symposium on, pages 160–164. IEEE, 1982.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Xin Zhang, Hsu-Chun Hsiao, Geoffrey Hasker, Haowen Chan, Adrian Perrig, and David G Andersen. SCION: Scalability, control, and isolation on next-generation networks. In Security and Privacy (SP), 2011 IEEE Symposium on, pages 212–227. IEEE, 2011.10.1109/SP.2011.45Search in Google Scholar

[39] Xin Zhang, Abhishek Jain, and Adrian Perrig. Packet-dropping adversary identification for data plane security. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM CoNEXT Conference, CoNEXT ’08, pages 24:1–24:12, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.10.1145/1544012.1544036Search in Google Scholar

[40] Xin Zhang, Chang Lan, and Adrian Perrig. Secure and scalable fault localization under dynamic traffic patterns. In Security and Privacy (SP), 2012 IEEE Symposium on, pages 317–331. IEEE, 2012.10.1109/SP.2012.27Search in Google Scholar

[41] Xin Zhang, Zongwei Zhou, Hsu-Chun Hsiao, Tiffany Hyun-Jin Kim, Adrian Perrig, and Patrick Tague. Shortmac: Efficient data-plane fault localization. In NDSS, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

• Understanding Privacy-Related Advice on Stack Overflow

• Revisiting Identification Issues in GDPR ‘Right Of Access’ Policies: A Technical and Longitudinal Analysis

• Employees’ privacy perceptions: exploring the dimensionality and antecedents of personal data sensitivity and willingness to disclose

• Visualizing Privacy-Utility Trade-Offs in Differentially Private Data Releases

• Analyzing the Feasibility and Generalizability of Fingerprinting Internet of Things Devices

• CoverDrop: Blowing the Whistle Through A News App

• Building a Privacy-Preserving Smart Camera System

• FP-Radar: Longitudinal Measurement and Early Detection of Browser Fingerprinting

• Are iPhones Really Better for Privacy? A Comparative Study of iOS and Android Apps

• How to prove any NP statement jointly? Efficient Distributed-prover Zero-Knowledge Protocols

• Editors’ Introduction

• PUBA: Privacy-Preserving User-Data Bookkeeping and Analytics

• Who Knows I Like Jelly Beans? An Investigation Into Search Privacy

• SoK: Plausibly Deniable Storage

• d3p - A Python Package for Differentially-Private Probabilistic Programming

• Updatable Private Set Intersection

• Knowledge Cross-Distillation for Membership Privacy

• RegulaTor: A Straightforward Website Fingerprinting Defense

• Privacy-Preserving Positioning in Wi-Fi Fine Timing Measurement

• Efficient Set Membership Proofs using MPC-in-the-Head

• Checking Websites’ GDPR Consent Compliance for Marketing Emails

• Comprehensive Analysis of Privacy Leakage in Vertical Federated Learning During Prediction

• Understanding Utility and Privacy of Demographic Data in Education Technology by Causal Analysis and Adversarial-Censoring

• User-Level Label Leakage from Gradients in Federated Learning

• Privacy-preserving training of tree ensembles over continuous data

• Differentially Private Simple Linear Regression

• Increasing Adoption of Tor Browser Using Informational and Planning Nudges