MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301170153 · doi:10.1145/3538969.3544412

Analysis and prediction of web proxies misbehavior

2022· article· en· W4301170153 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Nezhadian, Enrico Branca, Natalia Stakhanova

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 17th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)The InternetProxy (statistics)World Wide WebServerAnonymityWeb contentProxy serverWeb serverWeb analyticsWeb developmentWeb application securityComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for anonymity and privacy has given a rise to open web proxies that act as gateways relaying traffic between web servers and their clients, allowing users to access otherwise not accessible content. As the open web proxy ecosystem continues to grow, research studies point out the extent of content alteration on the Internet. While the previous studies focused on detection and analysis of content manipulation by proxies, we focus on the feasibility of predicting these manipulations. In this work, we present a new approach for predicting the types of content alterations that might be silently introduced by open proxies. Our approach is designed to proactively indicate changes without a need to fetch the data through a proxy first. We explore the feasibility of the approach on a website content of 1028 domains fetched through 1293 proxies. We leverage our approach to proactively and accurately identify various content manipulations with 87% - 92% accuracy. Our study reveals an important observation that the majority of proxies manipulate website content based on technical information of the website and its web server.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 17th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and SecuritySame topicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingFrench-language works237,207