skip to main content
10.1145/3355369.3355577acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Information Exposure From Consumer IoT Devices: A Multidimensional, Network-Informed Measurement Approach

Published:21 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Internet of Things (IoT) devices are increasingly found in everyday homes, providing useful functionality for devices such as TVs, smart speakers, and video doorbells. Along with their benefits come potential privacy risks, since these devices can communicate information about their users to other parties over the Internet. However, understanding these risks in depth and at scale is difficult due to heterogeneity in devices' user interfaces, protocols, and functionality.

In this work, we conduct a multidimensional analysis of information exposure from 81 devices located in labs in the US and UK. Through a total of 34,586 rigorous automated and manual controlled experiments, we characterize information exposure in terms of destinations of Internet traffic, whether the contents of communication are protected by encryption, what are the IoT-device interactions that can be inferred from such content, and whether there are unexpected exposures of private and/or sensitive information (e.g., video surreptitiously transmitted by a recording device). We highlight regional differences between these results, potentially due to different privacy regulations in the US and UK. Last, we compare our controlled experiments with data gathered from an in situ user study comprising 36 participants.

References

  1. IoT Inspector. https://iot-inspector.princeton.edu/, 2019. (Accessed on 05/08/2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Acar A., Fereidooni, H., Abera, T., Sikder, A. K., Miettinen, M., Aksu, H., Conti, M., Sadeghi, A.-R., and Uluagac, A. S. Peek-a-Boo: I see your smart home activities, even encrypted! arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.02741 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Alrawi, O., Lever, C., Antonakakis, M., and Monrose, F. Sok: Security Evaluation of Home-based IoT Deployments. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P) (2019).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Amar, Y., Haddadi, H., Mortier, R., Brown, A., Colley, J. A., and Crabtree, A. An analysis of home iot network traffic and behaviour. CoRR abs/1803.05368 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Apthorpe, N., Reisman, D., Sundaresan, S., Narayanan, A., and Feamster, N. Spying on the Smart Home: Privacy Attacks and Defenses on Encrypted IoT Traffic. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.05044 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Avast. Avast Smart Life. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.avast.com/en-us/iot.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Bitdefender. Bitdefender Box. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.bitdefender.com/box.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Bullguard. Dojo by Bullguard. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://dojo.bullguard.com/dojo-by-bullguard/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Burke, S. Google admits its new smart speaker was eavesdropping on users. Accessed May 8, 2019. http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/11/technology/google-home-mini-security-flaw.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Chu, G., Apthorpe, N., and Feamster, N. Security and Privacy Analyses of Internet of Things Children?s Toys. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6, 1 (2019), 978--985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Cujo. Cujo Smart Firewall. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.getcujo.com/smart-firewall-cujo/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. F-Secure. F-Secure Sense. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.f-secure.com/en_US/web/home_us/sense.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gartner Inc. Gartner Says 8.4 Billion Connected "Things" Will Be in Use in 2017, Up 31 Percent From 2016. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3598917.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamza A., Gharakheili, H. H., Benson, T. A., and Sivaraman, V. Detecting Volumetric Attacks on loT Devices via SDN-Based Monitoring of MUD Activity. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Symposium on SDN Research (New York, NY, USA, 2019), SOSR '19, ACM, pp. 36--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamza, A., Ranathunga, D., Gharakheili, H. H., Benson, T. A., Roughan, M., and Sivaraman, V. Verifying and Monitoring IoTs Network Behavior using MUD Profiles. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.02484 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hamza, A., Ranathunga, D., Gharakheili, H. H., Roughan, M., and Sivaraman, V. Clear As MUD: Generating, Validating and Applying IoT Behavioral Profiles. In Proceedings of the 2018 Workshop on IoT Security and Privacy (New York, NY, USA, 2018), IoT S&P '18, ACM, pp. 8--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. HighIoT. Akita. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://akita.cloud/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. IoT Defense. RATtrap. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.myrattrap.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jia, Y., Xiao, Y., Yu, J., Cheng, X., Liang, Z., and Wan, Z. A Novel Graph-based Mechanism for Identifying Traffic Vulnerabilities in Smart Home IoT. In IEEE INFOCOM 2018 (April 2018), pp. 1493--1501.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jose, A. C., Malekian, R., and Ye, N. Improving home automation security; integrating device fingerprinting into smart home. IEEE Access 4 (2016), 5776--5787.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Keezel. Keezel. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://keezel.co/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Kurtz, A., Gascon, H., Becker, T., Rieck, K., and Freiling, F. Fingerprinting Mobile Devices Using Personalized Configurations. In Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETS '16) (2016), pp. 4--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Le, A., Varmarken, J., Langhoff, S., Shuba, A., Gjoka, M., and Markopoulou, A. AntMonitor: A System for Monitoring from Mobile Devices. In Proc. of Workshop on Crowdsourcing and Crowdsharing of Big (Internet) Data (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Lear, E., Droms, R., and Romascanu, D. Manufacturer Usage Description Specification. IETF RFC8520 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Leung, C., Ren, J., Choffnes, D., and Wilson, C. Should you use the app for that?: Comparing the privacy implications of app-and web-based online services. In Proc. of IMC (2016).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Liu, H., Li, C., Jin, X., Li, J., Zhang, Y., and Gu, D. Smart solution, poor protection: An empirical study of security and privacy issues in developing and deploying smart home devices. In Proc. of the 2017 Workshop on Internet of Things Security and Privacy (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IoT S&P '17, ACM, pp. 13--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Loit, F., Sivanathant, A., Gharakheilit, H. H., Radford, A., and Sivaramant, V. Systematically evaluating security and privacy for consumer iot devices. In Proc. of the 2017 Workshop on Internet of Things Security and Privacy (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IoT S&P '17, ACM, pp.1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Luma Home. Luma Home WiFi System. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://lumahome.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Marchal, S., Miettinen, M., Nguyen, T. D., Sadeghi, A.-R., and Asokan, N. AuDI: Towards autonomous IoT device-type identification using periodic communications. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (2019).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. McAfee. McAfee Secure Home Platform. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://securehomeplatform.mcafee.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Mi, X., Qian, F., Zhang, Y., and Wang, X. An empirical characterization of ifttt: Ecosystem, usage, and performance. In Proc. of IMC (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IMC '17, ACM, pp. 398--404.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Michéle, B., and Karpow, A. Watch and be watched: Compromising all smart tv generations. In 2014 IEEE 11th Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC '14) (2014), IEEE, pp. 351--356.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Msadek, M. N., Soua, R., and Engel, T. IoT Device Fingerprinting: Machine Learning based Encrypted Traffic Analysis. In The IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC) (2019).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Norton. Norton Core. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://us.norton.com/core.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Razaghpanah, A., Vallina-Rodriguez, N., Sundaresan, S., Kreibich, C., Gill, P., Allman, M., and Paxson, V. Haystack: In Situ Mobile Traffic Analysis in User Space. arXiv preprint arXiv 1510.01419 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Rehman, M. A., Choffnes, D., and Goldberg, S. Passport. https://passport.ccs.neu.edu/, 2017. (Accessed on 05/08/2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ren, J., Rao, A., Lindorfer, M., Legout, A., and Choffnes, D. R. ReCon: Revealing and Controlling Privacy Leaks in Mobile Network Traffic. In Proc. of MobiSys (2016).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Ring. Privacy notice. https://shop.ring.com/pages/privacy, March 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Shasha, S., Mahmoud, M., Mannan, M., and Youssef, A. Playing with danger: A taxonomy and evaluation of threats to smart toys. IEEE Internet of Things Journal (2019), 1--1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Shodan. The search engine for internet-connected devices. Accessed May 8, 2019. https://www.shodan.io/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Singh, A., Murali, S., Rieger, L., Li, R., Hommes, S., State, R., Ormazabal, G., and Schulzrinne, H. HANZO: Collaborative Network Defense for Connected Things. In 2018 Principles, Systems and Applications of IP Telecommunications (IPTComm) (Oct 2018), pp. 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Sivanathan, A., Habibi Gharakheili, H., Loi, F., Radford, A., Wijenayake, C., Vishwanath, A., and Sivaraman, V. Classifying IoT Devices in Smart Environments Using Network Traffic Characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing (2018), 1--1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Sivaraman, V., Gharakheili, H. H., Fernandes, C., Clark, N., and Karliychuk, T. Smart IoT Devices in the Home: Security and Privacy Implications. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 37, 2 (June 2018), 71--79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Takbiri, N., Houmansadr, A., Goeckel, D. L., and Pishro-Nik, H. Matching Anonymized and Obfuscated Time Series to Users? Profiles. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 65, 2 (2019), 724--741.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Thangavelu, V., Divakaran, D. M., Sairam, R., Bhunia, S. S., and Gurusamy, M. DEFT: A Distributed IoT Fingerprinting Technique. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6, 1 (2019), 940--952.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. US-CERT. CVE: The Standard for Information Security Vulnerability Names. Accessed May 8, 2019. http://cve.mitre.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Valente, J., and Cardenas, A. Security and privacy of smart toys. In Proc. of the 2017 Workshop on Internet of Things Security and Privacy (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IoT S&P '17, ACM, pp. 19--24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Warren, Tom. Amazon explains how Alexa recorded a private conversation and sent it to another user. Accessed on 05/25/2018. https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/24/17391898/amazon-alexa-private-conversation-recording-explanation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Wood, D., Apthorpe, N., and Feamster, N. Cleartext data transmissions in consumer iot medical devices. In Proc. of the 2017 Workshop on Internet of Things Security and Privacy (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IoT S&P '17, ACM, pp. 7--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    IMC '19: Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference
    October 2019
    497 pages
    ISBN:9781450369480
    DOI:10.1145/3355369

    Copyright © 2019 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 21 October 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    IMC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate39of197submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

    Upcoming Conference

    IMC '24
    ACM Internet Measurement Conference
    November 4 - 6, 2024
    Madrid , AA , Spain

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader