Anonymity Trilemma: Strong Anonymity, Low Bandwidth Overhead, Low Latency - Choose Two
Anonymity Trilemma: Strong Anonymity, Low Bandwidth Overhead, Low Latency - Choose Two
复制标题
DOI：
10.1109/sp.2018.00011
复制
发表时间：
2017-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Debajyoti Das;Sebastian Meiser;Esfandiar Mohammadi;Aniket Kate
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Debajyoti Das;Sebastian Meiser;Esfandiar Mohammadi;Aniket Kate
研究匿名通信(AC)协议的基本约束。我们分析了带宽开销、延迟开销以及针对全局被动(网络级)对手的发送方匿名或接收方匿名之间的关系。我们证实了一个三难问题，即AC协议只能实现以下三个性质中的两个：强匿名性(即，匿名性直到可以忽略的机会)、低带宽开销和低延迟开销。我们进一步研究了匿名性，以对抗一个更强大的全局被动对手，该对手还可以被动地危害一些AC协议节点。对于给定数量的受损节点，我们推导出带宽和延迟开销之间的必要约束，这些约束的违反使得AC协议不可能实现强匿名性。我们从文献中分析了著名的AC协议，并描述了这些协议在多大程度上满足了我们的必要限制。我们的基本必要约束不仅为改进现有的AC系统提供了指导，也为设计具有非传统带宽和延迟开销选择的新型AC协议提供了指导。
This work investigates the fundamental constraints of anonymous communication (AC) protocols. We analyze the relationship between bandwidth overhead, latency overhead, and sender anonymity or recipient anonymity against the global passive (network-level) adversary. We confirm the trilemma that an AC protocol can only achieve two out of the following three properties: strong anonymity (i.e., anonymity up to a negligible chance), low bandwidth overhead, and low latency overhead. We further study anonymity against a stronger global passive adversary that can additionally passively compromise some of the AC protocol nodes. For a given number of compromised nodes, we derive necessary constraints between bandwidth and latency overhead whose violation make it impossible for an AC protocol to achieve strong anonymity. We analyze prominent AC protocols from the literature and depict to which extent those satisfy our necessary constraints. Our fundamental necessary constraints offer a guideline not only for improving existing AC systems but also for designing novel AC protocols with non-traditional bandwidth and latency overhead choices.