Website fingerprinting on early QUIC traffic
This work addresses privacy risks for users of emerging QUIC protocols by showing they are highly vulnerable to attacks, which is incremental as it extends existing analysis to new protocols.
The paper investigates the vulnerability of QUIC protocols (GQUIC and IQUIC) and HTTPS to website fingerprinting attacks, finding that in early traffic scenarios, GQUIC is most vulnerable with attack accuracies reaching 95.4% and 95.5% for GQUIC and IQUIC respectively, compared to 60.7% for HTTPS.
Cryptographic protocols have been widely used to protect the user's privacy and avoid exposing private information. QUIC (Quick UDP Internet Connections), including the version originally designed by Google (GQUIC) and the version standardized by IETF (IQUIC), as alternatives to the traditional HTTP, demonstrate their unique transmission characteristics: based on UDP for encrypted resource transmitting, accelerating web page rendering. However, existing encrypted transmission schemes based on TCP are vulnerable to website fingerprinting (WFP) attacks, allowing adversaries to infer the users' visited websites by eavesdropping on the transmission channel. Whether GQUIC and IQUIC can effectively resist such attacks is worth investigating. In this paper, we study the vulnerabilities of GQUIC, IQUIC, and HTTPS to WFP attacks from the perspective of traffic analysis. Extensive experiments show that, in the early traffic scenario, GQUIC is the most vulnerable to WFP attacks among GQUIC, IQUIC, and HTTPS, while IQUIC is more vulnerable than HTTPS, but the vulnerability of the three protocols is similar in the normal full traffic scenario. Features transferring analysis shows that most features are transferable between protocols when on normal full traffic scenario. However, combining with the qualitative analysis of latent feature representation, we find that the transferring is inefficient when on early traffic, as GQUIC, IQUIC, and HTTPS show the significantly different magnitude of variation in the traffic distribution on early traffic. By upgrading the one-time WFP attacks to multiple WFP Top-a attacks, we find that the attack accuracy on GQUIC and IQUIC reach 95.4% and 95.5%, respectively, with only 40 packets and just using simple features, whereas reach only 60.7% when on HTTPS. We also demonstrate that the vulnerability of IQUIC is only slightly dependent on the network environment.