To Extend or not to Extend: on the Uniqueness of Browser Extensions and Web Logins
August 22, 2018 Β· Declared Dead Β· π WPES@CCS
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Gabor Gyorgy Gulyas, Doliere Francis Some, Nataliia Bielova, Claude Castelluccia
arXiv ID
1808.07359
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Citations
45
Venue
WPES@CCS
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Recent works showed that websites can detect browser extensions that users install and websites they are logged into. This poses significant privacy risks, since extensions and Web logins that reflect user's behavior, can be used to uniquely identify users on the Web. This paper reports on the first large-scale behavioral uniqueness study based on 16,393 users who visited our website. We test and detect the presence of 16,743 Chrome extensions, covering 28% of all free Chrome extensions. We also detect whether the user is connected to 60 different websites. We analyze how unique users are based on their behavior, and find out that 54.86% of users that have installed at least one detectable extension are unique; 19.53% of users are unique among those who have logged into one or more detectable websites; and 89.23% are unique among users with at least one extension and one login. We use an advanced fingerprinting algorithm and show that it is possible to identify a user in less than 625 milliseconds by selecting the most unique combinations of extensions. Because privacy extensions contribute to the uniqueness of users, we study the trade-off between the amount of trackers blocked by such extensions and how unique the users of these extensions are. We have found that privacy extensions should be considered more useful than harmful. The paper concludes with possible countermeasures.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted