MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030775397 · doi:10.1145/1519144.1519146

Application-based TCP hijacking

2009· article· en· W2030775397 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver Zheng, Jason Wai‐Lok Poon, Konstantin Beznosov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkTCP hole punchingZeta-TCPCompound TCPComputer securitySpoofing attackTransmission Control ProtocolNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present application-based TCP hijacking (ABTH), a new attack on TCP applications that exploits flaws due to the interplay between TCP and application protocols to inject data into an application session without either server or client applications noticing the spoofing attack. Following the injection of a TCP packet, ABTH resynchronizes the TCP stacks of both the server and the client. To eval-uate the feasibility and effectiveness of ABTH, we devel-oped a tool that allows impersonating users of Windows Live Messenger in the matter of few seconds. Due to its generic nature, ABTH can be mounted on a variety of mod-ern protocols for TCP-based applications. Countermeasures to thwart and/or limit the effectiveness of ABTH could in-clude strict Ethernet switching and cryptographic protection of messages. However, the former cannot be guaranteed by the application provider and the latter appears to be still prohibitively expensive for such large-scale applications with hundreds of millions of sporadic users as Windows Live Mes-senger.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207