MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400487859 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2024.3426046

De-Anonymizing Avatars in Virtual Reality: Attacks and Countermeasures

2024· article· en· W4400487859 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Meng, Y. H. Zhan, Jiachun Li, Suguo Du, Haojin Zhu, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual realityComputer securityHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By providing users with an immersive visual and acoustic experience, virtual reality (VR) serves as a foundational technique for the emerging metaverse. One of the most promising aspects of VR is its ability to protect users’ identities by transforming their physical appearances into avatars with arbitrary appearances in the virtual world. However, the increasing threat of de-anonymization attacks that seek to reveal users’ identities poses significant privacy risks. We propose AvatarHunter, a non-intrusive and user-unaware de-anonymization attack leveraging victims’ inherent movement signatures. AvatarHunter discreetly collects the avatar's gait information by recording videos in the VR scenario without requiring any permissions. Notably, we designed a Unity-based feature extractor that maintains the avatar's movement signature while enabling AvatarHunter to be resistant to changes in the avatar's appearance. We conduct real-world experiments on VRChat to evaluate AvatarHunter's effectiveness. The results demonstrate that in commercial settings, AvatarHunter achieves attack success rates (ASR) of 92.1% and 66.9% in closed-world and open-world avatar scenarios, respectively, significantly surpassing existing benchmarks. Additionally, simulations using an open-source dataset confirm that AvatarHunter can attain over 78% ASR in full-body tracking scenarios. Finally, we discuss several countermeasures and implement an obfuscation mechanism during the avatar rendering phase, significantly reducing the ASR.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207