On Realistically Attacking Tor with Website Fingerprinting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Website fingerprinting allows a local, passive observer monitoring a web-browsing client’s encrypted channel to determine her web activity. Previous attacks have shown that website fingerprinting could be a threat to anonymity networks such as Tor under laboratory conditions. However, there are significant differences between laboratory conditions and realistic conditions. First, in laboratory tests we collect the training data set together with the testing data set, so the training data set is fresh, but an attacker may not be able to maintain a fresh data set. Second, laboratory packet sequences correspond to a single page each, but for realistic packet sequences the split between pages is not obvious. Third, packet sequences may include background noise from other types of web traffic. These differences adversely affect website fingerprinting under realistic conditions. In this paper, we tackle these three problems to bridge the gap between laboratory and realistic conditions for website fingerprinting. We show that we can maintain a fresh training set with minimal resources. We demonstrate several classification-based techniques that allow us to split full packet sequences effectively into sequences corresponding to a single page each. We describe several new algorithms for tackling background noise. With our techniques, we are able to build the first website fingerprinting system that can operate directly on packet sequences collected in the wild.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it