Online Social Networks (OSNs) have rapidly become a prominent and widely used service, offering a wealth of personal and sensitive information with significant security and privacy implications. Hence, OSNs are also an important - and popular - subje
ct for research. To perform research based on real-life evidence, however, researchers may need to access OSN data, such as texts and files uploaded by users and connections among users. This raises significant ethical problems. Currently, there are no clear ethical guidelines, and researchers may end up (unintentionally) performing ethically questionable research, sometimes even when more ethical research alternatives exist. For example, several studies have employed `fake identities` to collect data from OSNs, but fake identities may be used for attacks and are considered a security issue. Is it legitimate to use fake identities for studying OSNs or for collecting OSN data for research? We present a taxonomy of the ethical challenges facing researchers of OSNs and compare different approaches. We demonstrate how ethical considerations have been taken into account in previous studies that used fake identities. In addition, several possible approaches are offered to reduce or avoid ethical misconducts. We hope this work will stimulate the development and use of ethical practices and methods in the research of online social networks.
Everyone is concerned about the Internet security, yet most traffic is not cryptographically protected. The usual justification is that most attackers are only off-path and cannot intercept traffic; hence, challenge-response mechanisms suffice to ens
ure authenticity. Usually, the challenges re-use existing `unpredictable header fields to protect widely-deployed protocols such as TCP and DNS. We argue that this practice may often only give an illusion of security. We present recent off-path TCP injection and DNS poisoning attacks, enabling attackers to circumvent existing challenge-response defenses. Both TCP and DNS attacks are non-trivial, yet very efficient and practical. The attacks foil widely deployed security mechanisms, such as the Same Origin Policy, and allow a wide range of exploits, e.g., long-term caching of malicious objects and scripts. We hope that this article will motivate adoption of cryptographic mechanisms such as SSL/TLS, IPsec and DNSSEC, and of correct, secure challenge-response mechanisms.
We investigate defenses against DNS cache poisoning focusing on mechanisms that can be readily deployed unilaterally by the resolving organisation, preferably in a single gateway or a proxy. DNS poisoning is (still) a major threat to Internet securit
y; determined spoofing attackers are often able to circumvent currently deployed antidotes such as port randomisation. The adoption of DNSSEC, which would foil DNS poisoning, remains a long-term challenge. We discuss limitations of the prominent resolver-only defenses, mainly port and IP randomisation, 0x20 encoding and birthday protection. We then present two new (unilateral) defenses: the sandwich antidote and the NAT antidote. The defenses are simple, effective and efficient, and can be implemented in a gateway connecting the resolver to the Internet. The sandwich antidote is composed of two phases: poisoning-attack detection and then prevention. The NAT antidote adds entropy to DNS requests by switching the resolvers IP address to a random address (belonging to the same autonomous system). Finally, we show how to implement the birthday protection mechanism in the gateway, thus allowing to restrict the number of DNS requests with the same query to 1 even when the resolver does not support this.
In spite of the availability of DNSSEC, which protects against cache poisoning even by MitM attackers, many caching DNS resolvers still rely for their security against poisoning on merely validating that DNS responses contain some unpredictable value
s, copied from the re- quest. These values include the 16 bit identifier field, and other fields, randomised and validated by different patches to DNS. We investigate the prominent patches, and show how attackers can circumvent all of them, namely: - We show how attackers can circumvent source port randomisation, in the (common) case where the resolver connects to the Internet via different NAT devices. - We show how attackers can circumvent IP address randomisation, using some (standard-conforming) resolvers. - We show how attackers can circumvent query randomisation, including both randomisation by prepending a random nonce and case randomisation (0x20 encoding). We present countermeasures preventing our attacks; however, we believe that our attacks provide additional motivation for adoption of DNSSEC (or other MitM-secure defenses).
