MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408216059 · doi:10.56553/popets-2025-0084

Why Am I Seeing Double? An Investigation of Device Management Flaws in Voice Assistant Platforms

2025· article· en· W4408216059 on OpenAlexaff
Muslum Ozgur Ozmen, Mehmet Oguz Sakaoglu, Jackson Bizjak, Jianliang Wu, Antonio Bianchi, Dave Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Voice Assistant (VA) platforms, when users add devices to their accounts and give voice commands, complex interactions occur between the devices, skills, VA clouds, and vendor clouds. These interactions are governed by the device management capabilities (DMC) of VA platforms, which rely on device names, types, and associated skills in the user account. Prior work studied vulnerabilities in specific VA components, such as hidden voice commands and bypassing skill vetting. However, the security and privacy implications of device management flaws have largely been unexplored. In this paper, we introduce DMC-Xplorer, a testing framework for the automated discovery of VA device management flaws. We first introduce VA description language (VDL), a new domain-specific language to create VA environments for testing, using VA and skill developer APIs. DMC-Xplorer then selects VA parameters (device names, types, vendors, actions, and skills) in a combinatorial approach and creates VA environments with VDL. It issues real voice commands to the environment via developer APIs and logs event traces. It validates the traces against three formal security properties that define the secure operation of VA platforms. Lastly, DMC-Xplorer identifies the root cause of property violations through intervention analysis to identify VA device management flaws. We exercised DMC-Xplorer on Amazon Alexa and Google Home and discovered two design flaws that can be exploited to launch four attacks. We show that malicious skills with default permissions can eavesdrop on privacy-sensitive device states, prevent users from controlling their devices, and disrupt the services on the VA cloud.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing TechnologiesSame topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207