Anonymity Services Tor, I2P, JonDonym: Classifying in the Dark (Web)
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
Traffic Classification (TC) is an important tool for several tasks, applied in different fields (security, management, traffic engineering, R&D). This process is impaired or prevented by privacy-preserving protocols and tools, that encrypt the communication content, and (in case of anonymity tools) additionally hide the source, the destination, and the nature of the communication. In this paper, leveraging a public dataset released in 2017, we provide classification results with the aim of investigating to which degree the specific anonymity tool (and the traffic it hides) can be identified, when compared to the traffic of other considered anonymity tools, using five machine learning classifiers. Initially, flow-based TC is considered, and the effects of feature importance and temporal-related features to the network are investigated. Additionally, the role of finer-grained features, such as the (joint) histogram of packet lengths (and inter-arrival times), is determined. Successively, “early” TC of anonymous networks is analyzed. Results show that the considered anonymity networks (Tor, I2P, JonDonym) can be easily distinguished (with an accuracy of 99.87% and 99.80%, in case of flow-based and early-TC, respectively), telling even the specific application generating the traffic (with an accuracy of 73.99% and 66.76%, in case of flow-based and early-TC, respectively).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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