A Survey of Anonymous Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing

  • Tom Chothia
  • Konstantinos Chatzikokolakis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3823)


This paper provides a survey of searchable, peer-to-peer file-sharing systems that offer the user some form of anonymity. We start this survey by giving a brief description of the most popular methods of providing anonymous communication. These include the Ants protocol, Onion routing, Multicasting, MIXes and UDP address spoofing. We then describe a number of implemented systems based on one, or a combination of, these methods. Finally, we discuss possible attacks on the anonymity of these systems and give examples of particular attacks and defences used by the systems we describe.


  1. [BASM04]
    Bono, S., Soghoian, C.A., Monrose, F.: Mantis: A high-performance, anonymity preserving, p2p network, Johns Hopkins University Information Security Institute Technical Report TR-2004-01-B-ISI-JHU (2004)Google Scholar
  2. [BMS01]
    Back, A., Möller, U., Stiglic, A.: Traffic analysis attacks and trade-offs in anonymity providing systems. In: Moskowitz, I.S. (ed.) IH 2001. LNCS, vol. 2137, p. 245. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Cha81]
    Chaum, D.: Untraceable electronic mail, return addresses, and digital pseudonyms. Communications of the ACM 4(2) (February 1981)Google Scholar
  4. [Cha88]
    Chaum, D.: The dining cryptographers problem: Unconditional sender and recipient untranceability. Communications of the ACM 24(2) (1988)Google Scholar
  5. [CSWH01]
    Clarke, I., Sandberg, O., Wiley, B., Hong, T.W.: Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. In: Federrath, H. (ed.) Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies. LNCS, vol. 2009, p. 46. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [Dee89]
    Deering, S.: Rfc 1112 host extensions for ip multicasting (August 1989)Google Scholar
  7. [DFM00]
    Dingledine, R., Freedman, M.J., Molnar, D.: The free haven project: Distributed anonymous storage service. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Design Issues in Anonymity and Unobservability (July 2000)Google Scholar
  8. [DKK+05]
    Dumitriu, D., Knightly, E., Kuzmanovic, A., Stoica, I., Zwaenepoel, W.: Denial-of-service resilience in peer-to-peer file sharing systems. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 33(1), 38–49 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [DMS04]
    Dingledine, R., Mathewson, N., Syverson, P.: Tor: The second-generation onion router. In: Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Security Symposium (2004)Google Scholar
  10. [DO00]
    Dolev, S., Ostrovsky, R.: Xor-trees for efficient anonymous multicast and reception. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security 3(2), 63–84 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [Dou02]
    Douceur, J.R.: The sybil attack. In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, M.F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, p. 251. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [GSB02]
    Gunes, M., Sorges, U., Bouazzi, I.: Ara – the ant-colony based routing algorithm for manets. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Ad Hoc Networking (IWAHN 2002), Vancouver (August 2002)Google Scholar
  13. [GT96]
    Gulcu, C., Tsudik, G.: Mixing email with babel. In: SNDSS 1996: Proceedings of the 1996 Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (SNDSS 1996), p. 2. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1996)Google Scholar
  14. [HLX+05]
    Han, J., Liu, Y., Li, X., Xiao, R., Ni, L.M.: A mutual anonymous peer-to-peer protocol design. ipdps 1(1), 68 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. [Küg03]
    Kügler, D.: An analysis of gnunet and the implications for anonymous, censorship-resistant networks. In: Dingledine, R. (ed.) PET 2003. LNCS, vol. 2760, pp. 161–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [Ley04]
    Leyden, J.: Japanese p2p founder arrested. The Register, May 10 (2004), http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/10/winny_founder_arrested/
  17. [LRWW04]
    Levine, B.N., Reiter, M.K., Wang, C., Wright, M.K.: Timing attacks in low-latency mix-based systems. In: Juels, A. (ed.) FC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3110, pp. 251–265. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [MOP+04]
    Mislove, A., Oberoi, G., Post, A., Reis, C., Druschel, P., Wallach, D.: Ap3: A cooperative, decentralized service providing anonymous communication. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGOPS European Workshop, Leuven, Belgium (September 2004)Google Scholar
  19. [PK04]
    Pfitzmann, A., Köhntopp, M.: Anonymity, unobservability, and pseudonymity: A proposal for terminology, draft v0.21 (September 2004)Google Scholar
  20. [Ray00]
    Raymond, J.-F.: Traffic analysis: Protocols, attacks, design issues, and open problems. In: Federrath, H. (ed.) Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies. LNCS, vol. 2009, pp. 10–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [RD01]
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware), pp. 329–350 (November 2001)Google Scholar
  22. [RR98]
    Reiter, M., Rubin, A.: Crowds: anonymity for web transactions. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security 1(1), 66–92 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [SGR97]
    Syverson, P.F., Goldschlag, D.M., Reed, M.G.: Anonymous connections and onion routing. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (1997)Google Scholar
  24. [Shm02]
    Shmatikov, V.: Probabilistic analysis of anonymity. In: IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW), pp. 119–128 (2002)Google Scholar
  25. [SLS01]
    Scarlata, V., Levine, B., Shields, C.: Responder anonymity and anonymous peer-to-peer file sharing. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols, ICNP (2001)Google Scholar
  26. [SS03]
    Serjantov, A., Sewell, P.: Passive attack analysis for connection-based anonymity systems. In: Snekkenes, E., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2808, pp. 116–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [WALS01]
    Wright, M., Adler, M., Levine, B., Shields, C.: An analysis of the degradation of anonymous protocols. Technical report, University of Massachusetts, Amherst (April 2001)Google Scholar
  28. [WALS03]
    Wright, M., Adler, M., Levine, B.N., Shields, C.: Defending anonymous communication against passive logging attacks. In: Proc. IEEE Symposium on Research in Security and Privacy, Berkeley, CA (May 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Chothia
    • 1
  • Konstantinos Chatzikokolakis
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d’InformatiqueÉcole PolytechniquePalaiseauFrance

Personalised recommendations