skip to main content
10.1145/3343737.3343739acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesapsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Using Inputs and Context to Verify User Intentions in Internet Services

Published:19 August 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

An open security problem is how a server can tell whether a request submitted by a client is legitimately intended by the user or fakes by malware that has infected the user's system. This paper proposes Attested Intentions (AINT), to ensure user intention is properly translated to service requests. AINT uses a trusted hypervisor to record user inputs and context, and uses an Intel SGX enclave to continuously verify that the context, where user interaction occurs, has not been tampered with. After verification, AINT also uses SGX enclave for execution protection to generate the service request using the inputs collected by the hypervisor. To address privacy concerns over the recording of user inputs and context, AINT performs all verification on the client device, so that recorded data is never transmitted to a remote party.

References

  1. Martín Abadi. 2004. Trusted Computing, Trusted Third Parties, and Verified Communications. In Security and Protection in Information Processing Systems, Yves Deswarte, Frédéric Cuppens, Sushil Jajodia, and Lingyu Wang (Eds.). Springer US, Boston, MA, 291--308. https://users.soe.ucsc.edu/~abadi/Papers/verif.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AMD. 2018. AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming. (Sept 2018). Retrieved Jan 17, 2019 from https://www.amd.com/system/files/TechDocs/24593.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. AMD. 2018. How to Capture and Stream Gameplay Using Radeon ReLive. (Dec 2018). Retrieved July 6, 2019 from https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/faq/dh-023Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. ARM. 2009. Arm Security Technology - Building a Secure System using TrustZone Technology. (April 2009). Retrieved Jan 16, 2019 from http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.prd29-genc-009492c/ch01s02s01.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ashwin Swaminathan, Yinian Mao, and Min Wu. 2006. Robust and secure image hashing. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 1, 2 (June 2006), 215--230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Elie Bursztein, Steven Bethard, John C. Mitchell, Dan Jurafsky, and Céline Fabry. 2010. How Good are Humans at Solving CAPTCHAs? A Large Scale Evaluation. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. Oakland, CA, USA. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5504799 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Nicholas Carlini and David A. Wagner. 2016. Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networks. CoRR abs/1608.04644 (2016). arXiv:1608.04644 http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.04644Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Peter M. Chen and Brian D. Noble. 2001. When virtual is better than real {operating system relocation to virtual machines}. In Proceedings Eighth Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. 133--138. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Andy Chou, Junfeng Yang, Benjamin Chelf, Seth Hallem, and Dawson Engler. 2001. An Empirical Study of Operating Systems Errors. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP '01). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 73--88. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Weidong Cui, Randy H. Katz, and Wai-tian Tan. 2005. BINDER: An Extrusion-based Break-In Detector for Personal Computers. In Proceedings of the 2005 USENIX Annual Technical Conference. USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/binder-anextrusion-based-break-in-detector-for-personal-computers/ Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Dancho Danchev. 2018. Inside India's CAPTCHA solving economy. (Aug 2018). Retrieved July 6, 2019 from https://www.zdnet.com/article/inside-indias-captcha-solving-economy/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Saba Eskandarian, Jonathan Cogan, Sawyer Birnbaum, Peh Chang Brandon, Dillon Franke Franke, Forest Fraser, Gaspar Garcia, Eric Gong, Hung T. Nguyen, Taresh K. Sethi, Vishal Subbiah, Michael Backes, Giancarlo Pellegrino, and Dan Boneh. 2019. Fidelius: Protecting User Secrets from Compromised Browsers. In 2019 2019 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Yanick Fratantonio, Chenxiong Qian, Simon P Chung, and Wenke Lee. 2017. Cloak and dagger: from two permissions to complete control of the UI feedback loop. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 1041--1057. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7958624Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Vinod Ganapathy, Matthew J. Renzelmann, Arini Balakrishnan, Michael M. Swift, and Somesh Jha. 2008. The Design and Implementation of Microdrivers. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS XIII). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 168--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ramakrishna Gummadi, Hari Balakrishnan, Petros Maniatis, and Sylvia Ratnasamy. 2009. Not-a-Bot: Improving Service Availability in the Face of Botnet Attacks. In Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI'09). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 307--320. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1558977.1558998 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Lin-Shung Huang, Alex Moshchuk, Helen J. Wang, Stuart Schecter, and Collin Jackson. 2012. Clickjacking: Attacks and Defenses. In Presented as part of the 21st USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 12). USENIX, Bellevue, WA, 413--428. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity12/technical-sessions/presentation/huang Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Intel. 2010. Intel® Trusted Execution Technology: White Paper. (2010). Retrieved Nov 15, 2018 from https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/trusted-execution-technology/trusted-execution-technology-security-paper.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Bhushan Jain, Mirza Basim Baig, Dongli Zhang, Donald E. Porter, and Radu Sion. 2014. Sok: Introspections on Trust and the Semantic Gap. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 605--620. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6956590 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Yeongjin Jang, Simon P Chung, Bryan D Payne, and Wenke Lee. 2014. Gyrus: A Framework for User-Intent Monitoring of Text-based Networked Applications.. In Proceedings of the 2014 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium. https://www.ndss-symposium. org/ndss2014/programme/gyrus-framework-user-intent-monitoring-text-based-networked-applications/Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Wenhao Li, Shiyu Luo, Zhichuang Sun, Yubin Xia, Long Lu, Haibo Chen, Binyu Zang, and Haibing Guan. 2018. VButton: Practical Attestation of User-driven Operations in Mobile Apps. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services (MobiSys '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 28--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. David Lie and Petros Maniatis. 2017. Glimmers: Resolving the Privacy/Trust Quagmire. In Proceedings of the 16th Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems (HotOS '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 94--99. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Lionel Litty, H Andrés Lagar-Cavilla, and David Lie. 2008. Hypervisor Support for Identifying Covertly Executing Binaries. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Security Symposium (SS'08). USENIX Association, San Jose, CA, 243--258. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1496728 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Jonathan M. McCune, Yanlin Li, Ning Qu, Zongwei Zhou, Anupam Datta, Virgil Gligor, and Adrian Perrig. 2010. TrustVisor: Efficient TCB Reduction and Attestation. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP '10). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 143--158. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Jonathan M. McCune, Bryan J. Parno, Adrian Perrig, Michael K. Reiter, and Hiroshi Isozaki. 2008. Flicker: An Execution Infrastructure for Tcb Minimization. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2008 (Eurosys '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 315--328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Frank McKeen, Ilya Alexandrovich, Alex Berenzon, Carlos V. Rozas, Hisham Shafi, Vedvyas Shanbhogue, and Uday R. Savagaonkar. 2013. Innovative Instructions and Software Model for Isolated Execution. In Proceedings of the 2Nd International Workshop on Hardware and Architectural Support for Security and Privacy (HASP '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 10, 1 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Microsoft. 2017. Microsoft ClearType overview. (Oct 2017). Retrieved July 6, 2019 from https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/cleartype/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Subhas C. Misra and Virendra C. Bhavsar. 2003. Relationships Between Selected Software Measures and Latent Bug-density: Guidelines for Improving Quality. In Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications: PartI (ICCSA'03). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 724--732. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1756748.1756832 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Nvidia. 2017. Record and Capture your Greatest Gaming Moments. (June 2017). Retrieved July 6, 2019 from https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/geforce-experience/shadowplay/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Lara O'Reilly. 2015. Google's new CAPTCHA security login raises 'legitimate privacy concerns'. (Feb 2015). Retrieved Dec 7, 2018 from https://www.businessinsider.com.au/google-no-captcha-adtruth-privacy-research-2015-2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Nicolas Papernot, Patrick McDaniel, Ian Goodfellow, Somesh Jha, Z. Berkay Celik, and Ananthram Swami. 2017. Practical Black-Box Attacks Against Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ASIA CCS '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 506--519. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Andrea Possemato, Andrea Lanzi, Simon Pak Ho Chung, Wenke Lee, and Yanick Fratantonio. 2018. ClickShield: Are You Hiding Something? Towards Eradicating Clickjacking on Android. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, 1120--1136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Ramarathnam Venkatesan, S.-M Koon, Mariusz Jakubowski, and Pierre Moulin. 2000. Robust image hashing. In Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No.00CH37101), Vol. 3. 664--666 vol.3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Takahiro Shinagawa, Hideki Eiraku, Kouichi Tanimoto, Kazumasa Omote, Shoichi Hasegawa, Takashi Horie, Manabu Hirano, Kenichi Kourai, Yoshihiro Oyama, Eiji Kawai, Kenji Kono, Shigeru Chiba, Yasushi Shinjo, and Kazuhiko Kato. 2009. BitVisor: A Thin Hypervisor for Enforcing I/O Device Security. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGPLAN/SIGOPS International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments (VEE '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 121--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. He Sun, Kun Sun, Yuewu Wang, Jiwu Jing, and Haining Wang. 2015. TrustICE: Hardware-Assisted Isolated Computing Environments on Mobile Devices. In 2015 45th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. 367--378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Michael M. Swift, Brian N. Bershad, and Henry M. Levy. 2003. Improving the Reliability of Commodity Operating Systems. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 207--222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Trusted Computing Group. 2016. TPM 2.0 Library Specification. (2016). Retrieved Nov 15, 2018 from https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/resource/tpm-library-specification/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Amit Vasudevan, Sagar Chaki, Limin Jia, Jonathan McCune, James Newsome, and Anupam Datta. 2013. Design, Implementation and Verification of an eXtensible and Modular Hypervisor Framework. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP '13). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 430--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Zongwei Zhou, Miao Yu, and Virgil D. Gligor. 2014. Dancing with Giants: Wimpy Kernels for On-Demand Isolated I/O. In 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 308--323. 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
    APSys '19: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGOPS Asia-Pacific Workshop on Systems
    August 2019
    115 pages
    ISBN:9781450368933
    DOI:10.1145/3343737

    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 the author(s) 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: 19 August 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    APSys '19 Paper Acceptance Rate15of36submissions,42%Overall Acceptance Rate149of386submissions,39%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader