Design and analysis of two-layer anonymous communication system

Abstract

A new architecture for scalable anonymous communication system(SACS) was proposed. The users were divided into several subgroups managed by different sub-blenders, and all sub-blenders were managed by the main-blender using two layers management scheme. The identity information of members are distributed on different sub-blenders, which makes each member keep much less information and network overload greatly reduce. The anonymity and the overhead of the new scheme were analyzed and compared with that of Crowds, which shows the cost of storage and network overhead for the new scheme largely decreases while the anonymity is little degraded. The experiment results also show that the new system architecture is well scalable. The ratio of management cost of SACS to that of Crowds is about 1:25 while the value of P(IsvH₁₊) only increases by 0.001–0.020, which shows that SACS keeps almost the same anonymity with Crowds.

Keywords

scalability / anonymity / performance analysis / communication system

References

[1] ChaumD.. The dining cryptographers problem: Unconditional sender and recipient untraceability[J]. Journal of Cryptology, 1988, 1(1): 65-75

[2] BertholdO., FederrathH., K OpsellS.. Web MIXes: A system for anonymous and unobservable internet access[C]. Workshop on Design Issues in Anonymity and Unobservability, 2001, Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag Press: 115-129

[3] DingledineR., MathewsonN., SyversonP.. Tor: The second-generation onion router[C]. Proceeding of the 13th USENIX Security Symposium, 2004, San Diego, ACM Press: 303-320

[4] MurdochS. J., DanezisG.. Low-cost traffic analysis of tor[C]. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2005, Oakland, IEEE Computer Soc: 183-195

[5] GoldschlagD., ReedM., SyversonP.. Onion routing for anonymous and private Internet connections[J]. Communications of the ACM, 1999, 42(2): 39-41

[6] ReiterM., RubinA.. Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions[J]. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 1998, 1(1): 62-92

[7] GOEL S, ROBSON M, POLTE M, et al. Herbivore: A scalable and efficient protocol for anonymous communication[R]. Computing and Information Science Technical Report TR2003-1890, Cornell University, 2003–04.

[8] SherwoodR., BhattacharjeeB., SrinivasanA.. P5: A protocol for scalable anonymous communication[C]. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2002, Oakland, IEEE Computer Society Press: 58-70

[9] FreedmanM., MorrisR.. Tarzan: A peer-to-peer anonymizing network layer[C]. The 9th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2002, Washington, DC, ACM Press: 193-206

[10] Harchol-balterM., LeughtonT., LewinD.. Resource discovery in distributed networks[C]. ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, 1999, Atlanta, ACM Press: 229-237

[11] WangW.-p., ChenJ.-e., ChenS.-q., et al.. Research on a short distance-prior rerouting scheme in anonymous communication[J]. Journal of Software, 2004, 15(4): 561-570

[12] WangW.-p., ChenJ.-e., WangJ.-xin.. An anonymous communication protocol based on groups with definite route length[J]. Journal of Computer Research and Development, 2003, 40(4): 609-614

[13] SuiH.-f., WangJ.-x., ChenJ., et al.. The cost of becoming anonymous: on the participant payload in Crowds[J]. Information Processing Letters, 2004, 90(4): 81-86

[14] SuiH.-f., ChenS.-q., ChenJ.-er.. Decreased forwarding probability based length control strategy of crowds[J]. Mini-micro Systems, 2005, 26(3): 387-391

[15] SuiH. F., WangJ. X., ChenJ. E., et al.. An analysis of Forwarding Mechanism in Crowds[C]. IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2003, Anchorage, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Computer Society: 261-265