A Game-Theoretic Analysis of Cooperation in Anonymity Networks

  • Mu Yang
  • Vladimiro Sassone
  • Sardaouna Hamadou
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7215)

Abstract

Anonymity systems are of paramount and growing importance in communication networks. They rely on users to cooperate to the realisation of an effective anonymity service. Yet, existing systems are marred by the action of ‘selfish’ free-loaders, so that several cooperation incentives are being proposed.

We propose a game-theoretic model of incentives in anonymity networks based on parametric utility functions, which make it flexible, adaptable and realistic. We then use the framework to analyse the cost of cooperation and the performance of the gold-star incentive scheme in the Crowds protocol.

Keywords

Nash Equilibrium Equilibrium Point Mixed Strategy Malicious User Forwarding Path 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Download to read the full conference paper text

References

  1. 1.
    Acquisti, A., Dingledine, R., Syverson, P.F.: On the Economics of Anonymity. In: Wright, R.N. (ed.) FC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2742, pp. 84–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Androulaki, E., Raykova, M., Srivatsan, S., Stavrou, A., Bellovin, S.M.: PAR: Payment for Anonymous Routing. In: Borisov, N., Goldberg, I. (eds.) PETS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5134, pp. 219–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    The anonymizer, http://www.anonymizer.com
  4. 4.
    Borisov, N., Danezis, G., Mittal, P., Tabriz, P.: Denial of service or denial of security? In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, CCS 2007, pp. 92–102. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bye, R., Luther, K., Çamtepe, S.A., Alpcan, T., Albayrak, Ş., Yener, B.: Decentralized Detector Generation in Cooperative Intrusion Detection Systems. In: Masuzawa, T., Tixeuil, S. (eds.) SSS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4838, pp. 37–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaum, D.: Untraceable electronic mail, return addresses, and digital pseudonyms. Commun. ACM 24(2), 84–88 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, Y., Sion, R., Carbunar, B.: Xpay: practical anonymous payments for tor routing and other networked services. In: Al-Shaer, E., Paraboschi, S. (eds.) WPES, pp. 41–50. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Damiani, E., di Vimercati, S.D.C., Paraboschi, S., Samarati, P., Violante, F.: A reputation-based approach for choosing reliable resources in peer-to-peer networks. In: Atluri, V. (ed.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 207–216. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dingledine, R., Mathewson, N., Syverson, P.F.: Tor: The second-generation onion router. In: USENIX Security Symposium, pp. 303–320. USENIX (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dingledine, R., Shmatikov, V., Syverson, P.: Synchronous batching: From cascades to free routes, pp. 186–206 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freedman, M.J., Morris, R.: Tarzan: a peer-to-peer anonymizing network layer. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 193–206 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fudenberg, D., Tirole, J.: Game Theory. MIT Press (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Halpern, J.Y., O’Neill, K.R.: Anonymity and information hiding in multiagent systems. Journal of Computer Security 13(3), 483–512 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamadou, S., Palamidessi, C., Sassone, V., ElSalamouny, E.: Probable Innocence in the Presence of Independent Knowledge. In: Degano, P., Guttman, J.D. (eds.) FAST 2009. LNCS, vol. 5983, pp. 141–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hopper, N., Vasserman, E.Y., Chan-Tin, E.: How much anonymity does network latency leak? ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 13(2) (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jansen, R., Hopper, N., Kim, Y.: Recruiting new tor relays with braids. In: Al-Shaer, E., Keromytis, A.D., Shmatikov, V. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 319–328. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, Y., Comaniciu, C., Man, H.: Modelling misbehaviour in ad hoc networks: a game theoretic approach for intrusion detection. IJSN 1(3/4), 243–254 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ma, R., Lee, S., Lui, J., Yau, D.: A game theoretic approach to provide incentive and service differentiation in P2P networks. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 32(1), 189–198 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McLachlan, J., Tran, A., Hopper, N., Kim, Y.: Scalable onion routing with Torsk. In: Al-Shaer, E., Jha, S., Keromytis, A.D. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 590–599. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Murdoch, S.J., Danezis, G.: Low-cost traffic analysis of tor. In: IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 183–195. IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nambiar, A., Wright, M.: Salsa: a structured approach to large-scale anonymity. In: Juels, A., Wright, R.N., di Vimercati, S.D.C. (eds.) ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 17–26. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Neff, C.A.: A verifiable secret shuffle and its application to e-voting. In: ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 116–125 (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    “Johnny” Ngan, T.-W., Dingledine, R., Wallach, D.S.: Building Incentives into Tor. In: Sion, R. (ed.) FC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6052, pp. 238–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reiter, M.K., Rubin, A.D.: Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 1(1), 66–92 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sassone, V., Hamadou, S., Yang, M.: Trust in Anonymity Networks. In: Gastin, P., Laroussinie, F. (eds.) CONCUR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6269, pp. 48–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lye, K.W., Wing, J.M.: Game strategies in network security. Int. J. Inf. Sec. 4(1-2), 71–86 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xiong, L., Liu, L.: Peertrust: Supporting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 16(7), 843–857 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yang, M., Sassone, V., Hamadou, S.: A game-theoretic analysis of cooperation in anonymity networks. Extended version of this paper available at, http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/23091
  29. 29.
    Zhou, R., Hwang, K.: Powertrust: A robust and scalable reputation system for trusted peer-to-peer computing. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 18(4), 460–473 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mu Yang
    • 1
  • Vladimiro Sassone
    • 1
  • Sardaouna Hamadou
    • 2
  1. 1.ECSUniversity of SouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Università Ca’ FoscariVeniceItaly

Personalised recommendations