Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Ultimate Victory of White- over Blacklisting for the Editing of Encrypted Instant Messages Without Decrypting Nor Understanding Them

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Innovations for Community Services (I4CS 2020)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1139))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (hereinafter denominated as Europol) has constantly warned society about the unbowed growth of child sexual exploitation in its six issued IOCTAs (Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessments). If already all attempts succeed to thwart grooming as the initiation of contacts between pedophiles and adolescents, then CSEM (Child Sexual Exploitation Material) cannot accrue and SGEM (Self Generated Explicit Material) does not find its way to perpetrators. IM (Instant Messaging) spearheads the list of preferred communication tools that render grooming possible. The consensual editing of encrypted instant messages without decrypting nor understanding them based on black- or whitelisting commits itself to the thwarting of grooming. Existing literature attests whitelisting better functionality and worse performance than blacklisting. In contrast, recent related work objects to the inferior performance of whitelisting, since former experiments for both paradigms happened under incomparable conditions, and demands their remake under fair circumstances. This scholarly piece refutes the inferiority of whitelisting by exhibiting the results of a new test series in which blacklisting screens the complementary set of words that whitelisting does not incorporate. At the end, it corroborates that whitelisting outplays blacklisting and emerges victorious.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Anderson, R.J.: Security Engineering - A Guide to Building Dependable Distributed Systems, 2nd Edn. Wiley (2008). https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/book.html

  2. Angerman, W.: Coming full circle with Boyd’s OODA loop ideas: an analysis of innovation diffusion and evolution. Master’s thesis, Defense Technical Information Center, March 2004. http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA425228

  3. Chai, Q., Gong, G.: Verifiable symmetric searchable encryption for semi-honest-but-curious cloud servers. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 917–922, June 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICC.2012.6364125

  4. Daemen, J., Rijmen, V.: The Design of Rijndael: AES - The Advanced Encryption Standard. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04722-4

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Douceur, J.R.: The Sybil attack. In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, pp. 251–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45748-8_24. http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/101

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Elgaby, M.: Computing on confidential character strings in an enhanced SIP-framework. Master’s thesis, University of Hagen, February 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2059.4241

  7. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2014, January 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/16

  8. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2015, June 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/03524

  9. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2016, December 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/275589

  10. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2017, September 2017. https://doi.org/10.2813/55735

  11. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2018, January 2019. https://doi.org/10.2813/858843

  12. Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2019, October 2019. https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/iocta_2019.pdf

  13. Fahrnberger, G.: Computing on encrypted character strings in clouds. In: Hota, C., Srimani, P.K. (eds.) ICDCIT 2013. LNCS, vol. 7753, pp. 244–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36071-8_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Fahrnberger, G.: SecureString 2.0 - a cryptosystem for computing on encrypted character strings in clouds. In: Eichler, G., Gumzej, R. (eds.) Networked Information Systems, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 826, pp. 226–240. VDI, Düsseldorf, June 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4846.7521/5

  15. Fahrnberger, G.: A second view on securestring 2.0. In: Natarajan, R. (ed.) ICDCIT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8337, pp. 239–250. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04483-5_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Fahrnberger, G.: SIMS: a comprehensive approach for a secure instant messaging sifter. In: 2014 IEEE 13th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom), pp. 164–173, September 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/TrustCom.2014.25

  17. Fahrnberger, G.: Repetition pattern attack on multi-word-containing SecureString 2.0 objects. In: Natarajan, R., Barua, G., Patra, M.R. (eds.) ICDCIT 2015. LNCS, vol. 8956, pp. 265–277. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14977-6_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Fahrnberger, G.: A detailed view on securestring 3.0. In: Chakrabarti, A., Sharma, N., Balas, V.E. (eds.) Advances in Computing Applications, pp. 97–121. Springer, Singapore (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2630-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Fahrnberger, G.: Secure whitelisting of instant messages. In: Fahrnberger, G., Eichler, G., Erfurth, C. (eds.) I4CS 2016. CCIS, vol. 648, pp. 90–111. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49466-1_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Fahrnberger, G.: Secure filtering techniques for instant messaging. In: Unger, H., Halang, W.A. (eds.) Autonomous Systems 2017, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 857, pp. 226–240. VDI, Düsseldorf, October 2017. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29962.77761/1

  21. Fahrnberger, G.: Blind censoring for instant messaging. In: Kubek, M.M., Li, Z. (eds.) Autonomous Systems 2018, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 862, pp. 62–80. VDI, Düsseldorf, October 2018. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21331.63520/1

  22. Fahrnberger, G.: Editing encrypted messages without decrypting nor understanding them. Ph.D. thesis, University of Hagen, June 2019. https://doi.org/10.18445/20190616-221209-3

  23. Fahrnberger, G., Heneis, K.: SecureString 3.0. In: Natarajan, R., Barua, G., Patra, M.R. (eds.) ICDCIT 2015. LNCS, vol. 8956, pp. 331–334. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14977-6_33

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Fahrnberger, G., Nayak, D., Martha, V.S., Ramaswamy, S.: SafeChat: a tool to shield children’s communication from explicit messages. In: 2014 14th International Conference on Innovations for Community Services (I4CS), pp. 80–86, June 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/I4CS.2014.6860557

  25. Freitag, D.: Erweiterung eines SMPP-Frameworks zur sicheren Verarbeitung vertraulicher Zeichenketten. Master’s thesis, University of Hagen, September 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4680.8641

  26. Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design science research in information systems. In: Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S. (eds.) Design Research in Information Systems. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol. 22, pp. 9–22. Springer, Boston (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5653-8_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Housley, R.: Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). RFC 5652 (Proposed Standard), September 2009. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5652.txt

  28. ISO/IEC 10116:2006: Information Technology - Security Techniques - Modes of Operation for an n-Bit Block Cipher. International Organization for Standardization, February 2006. https://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=38761

  29. Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1145/219717.219748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), February 2014. https://www.nist.gov/document-3766

  31. Örencik, C., Savas, E.: An efficient privacy-preserving multi-keyword search over encrypted cloud data with ranking. Distrib. Parallel Databases 32(1), 119–160 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-013-7123-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Adleman, L.: A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Commun. ACM 21(2), 120–126 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1145/359340.359342

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Stebila, D., Green, J.: Elliptic Curve Algorithm Integration in the Secure Shell Transport Layer. RFC 5656 (Proposed Standard), December 2009. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5656.txt

  34. Waksman, A., Sethumadhavan, S.: Tamper evident microprocessors. In: 2010 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 173–188, May 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2010.19

  35. van der Zwaan, J.M., Dignum, V., Jonker, C.M., van der Hof, S.: On technology against cyberbullying. In: van der Hof, S., van den Berg, B., Schermer, B. (eds.) Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety. ITLS, vol. 24, pp. 211–228. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-005-3_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Bettina Baumgartner from the University of Vienna for proofreading this paper!

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hagen, Hagen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

    Günter Fahrnberger

Authors
  1. Günter Fahrnberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Günter Fahrnberger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology, Bhubaneswar, India

    Siddharth Swarup Rautaray

  2. Deutsche Telekom Technology & Innovation, Darmstadt, Germany

    Gerald Eichler

  3. University of Applied Sciences Jena, Jena, Germany

    Christian Erfurth

  4. University of Hagen, Hagen, Germany

    Günter Fahrnberger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Fahrnberger, G. (2020). The Ultimate Victory of White- over Blacklisting for the Editing of Encrypted Instant Messages Without Decrypting Nor Understanding Them. In: Rautaray, S., Eichler, G., Erfurth, C., Fahrnberger, G. (eds) Innovations for Community Services. I4CS 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1139. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37484-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37484-6_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37483-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37484-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation