skip to main content
research-article

Requet: Real-Time QoE Metric Detection for Encrypted YouTube Traffic

Published: 10 July 2020 Publication History

Abstract

As video traffic dominates the Internet, it is important for operators to detect video quality of experience (QoE) to ensure adequate support for video traffic. With wide deployment of end-to-end encryption, traditional deep packet inspection--based traffic monitoring approaches are becoming ineffective. This poses a challenge for network operators to monitor user QoE and improve upon their experience. To resolve this issue, we develop and present a system for REal-time QUality of experience metric detection for <underline>E</underline>ncrypted Traffic—Requet—which is suitable for network middlebox deployment. Requet uses a detection algorithm that we develop to identify video and audio chunks from the IP headers of encrypted traffic. Features extracted from the chunk statistics are used as input to a machine learning algorithm to predict QoE metrics, specifically buffer warning (low buffer, high buffer), video state (buffer increase, buffer decay, steady, stall), and video resolution. We collect a large YouTube dataset consisting of diverse video assets delivered over various WiFi and LTE network conditions to evaluate the performance. We compare Requet with a baseline system based on previous work and show that Requet outperforms the baseline system in accuracy of predicting buffer low warning, video state, and video resolution by 1.12×, 1.53×, and 3.14×, respectively.

References

[1]
Wireshark. n.d. About Wireshark. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.wireshark.org/about.html.
[2]
Cisco. n.d. Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018--2023) White Paper. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html.
[3]
Telerik. n.d. Telerik Fiddler, the Free Web Debugging Proxy. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.telerik.com/fiddler.
[4]
Fortune. 2016. How Google Is Making YouTube Safer For Its Users. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from http://fortune.com/2016/08/02/google-youtube-encryption-https/.
[5]
Cisco. 2019. Cisco Encrypted Traffic Analytics. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/enterprise-networks/enterprise-network-security/nb-09-encrytd-traf-anlytcs-wp-cte-en.pdf.
[6]
3GPP. 2010. Transparent End-to-End Packet-Switched Streaming Service (PSS). TS 26.234. 3rd Generation Partnership Project. 3GPP.
[7]
Vaneet Aggarwal, Emir Halepovic, Jeffrey Pang, Shobha Venkataraman, and He Yan. 2014. Prometheus: Toward quality-of-experience estimation for mobile apps from passive network measurements. In Proceedings of ACM HotMobile.
[8]
Adnan Ahmed, Zubair Shafiq, Harkeerat Bedi, and Amir R. Khakpour. 2017. Suffering from buffering? Detecting QoE impairments in live video streams. In Proceedings of IEEE ICNP.
[9]
Johanna Amann, Oliver Gasser, Quirin Scheitle, Lexi Brent, Georg Carle, and Ralph Holz. 2017. Mission Accomplished? HTTPS Security AfterDigiNotar. In Proceedings of the ACM IMC Conference.
[10]
Lucian Armasu. 2016. Netflix Adopts Efficient HTTPS Encryption for Its Video Streams. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.tomshardware.com/news/netflix-efficient-https-video-streams,32420.html.
[11]
Francesco Bronzino, Paul Schmitt, Sara Ayoubi, Guilherme Martins, Renata Teixeira, and Nick Feamster. 2020. Inferring streaming video quality from encrypted traffic: Practical models and deployment experience. arXiv:1901.05800.
[12]
Pedro Casas, Michael Seufert, and Raimund Schatz. 2013. YOUQMON: A system for on-line monitoring of YouTube QoE in operational 3G networks. SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 41, 2 (2013), 44--46.
[13]
Giuseppe Cofano, Luca De Cicco, Thomas Zinner, Anh Nguyen-Ngoc, Phuoc Tran-Gia, and Saverio Mascolo. 2016. Design and experimental evaluation of network-assisted strategies for HTTP adaptive streaming. In Proceedings of ACM MMSys.
[14]
Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik. 1995. Support-vector networks. Machine Learning 20, 3 (1995), 273--297.
[15]
Yong Cui, Tianxiang Li, Cong Liu, Xingwei Wang, and Mirja Kühlewind. 2017. Innovating transport with QUIC: Design approaches and research challenges. IEEE Internet Computing 21, 2 (2017), 72--76.
[16]
Giorgos Dimopoulos, Ilias Leontiadis, Pere Barlet-Ros, and Konstantina Papagiannaki. 2016. Measuring video QoE from encrypted traffic. In Proceedings of ACM IMC.
[17]
Florin Dobrian, Vyas Sekar, Asad Awan, Ion Stoica, Dilip Joseph, Aditya Ganjam, Jibin Zhan, and Hui Zhang. 2011. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM.
[18]
Zakir Durumeric, Zane Ma, Drew Springall, Richard Barnes, Nick Sullivan, Elie Bursztein, Michael Bailey, J. Alex Halderman, and Vern Paxson. 2017. The security impact of HTTPS interception. In Proceedings of NDSS.
[19]
Roy T. Fielding and Julian F. Reschke. 2014. Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing. RFC 7230. IETF Trust.
[20]
S. Galetto, P. Bottaro, C. Carrara, F. Secco, A. Guidolin, E. Targa, Claudio Narduzzi, and Giada Giorgi. 2017. Detection of video/audio streaming packet flows for non-intrusive QoS/QoE monitoring. In Proceedings of IEEE MN.
[21]
Thiago A. Guarnieri, Idilio Drago, Alex Borges Vieira, Ítalo Cunha, and Jussara M. Almeida. 2017. Characterizing QoE in large-scale live streaming. In Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM.
[22]
Craig Gutterman, Katherine Guo, Sarthak Arora, Xiaoyang Wang, Les Wu, Ethan Katz-Bassett, and Gil Zussman. 2019. Requet: Real-time QoE detection for encrypted YouTube traffic. In Proceedings of of ACM MMSys.
[23]
Tin Kam Ho. 1995. Random decision forests. In Proceedings of IEEE ICDAR.
[24]
Te-Yuan Huang, Ramesh Johari, Nick McKeown, Matthew Trunnell, and Mark Watson. 2014. A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: Evidence from a large video streaming service. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM.
[25]
Arash Molavi Kakhki, Samuel Jero, David R. Choffnes, Cristina Nita-Rotaru, and Alan Mislove. 2017. Taking a long look at QUIC: An approach for rigorous evaluation of rapidly evolving transport protocols. In Proceedings of ACM IMC.
[26]
Vengatanathan Krishnamoorthi, Niklas Carlsson, Emir Halepovic, and Eric Petajan. 2017. BUFFEST: Predicting buffer conditions and real-time requirements of HTTP(S) adaptive streaming clients. In Proceedings of ACM MMSys.
[27]
Will Law. 2018. Ultra-Low-Latency Streaming Using Chunked-Encoded and Chunked-Transferred CMAF. Technical Report. Akamai.
[28]
Feng Li, Jae Won Chung, and Mark Claypool. 2018. Silhouette: Identifying YouTube video flows from encrypted traffic. In Proceedings of ACM NOSSDAV.
[29]
Yu-Ting Lin, Eduardo Mucelli Rezende Oliveira, Sana Ben Jemaa, and Salah-Eddine Elayoubi. 2017. Machine learning for predicting QoE of video streaming in mobile networks. In Proceedings of IEEE ICC.
[30]
Sharat Chandra Madanapalli, Hassan Habibi Gharakheili, and Vijay Sivaraman. 2019. Inferring Netflix user experience from broadband network measurement. In Proceedings of IEEE TMA.
[31]
Tarun Mangla, Emir Halepovic, Mostafa Ammar, and Ellen Zegura. 2018. eMIMIC: Estimating HTTP-based video QoE metrics from encrypted network traffic. In Proceedings of IEEE TMA.
[32]
Tarun Mangla, Emir Halepovic, Mostafa H. Ammar, and Ellen W. Zegura. 2017. MIMIC: Using passive network measurements to estimate HTTP-based adaptive video QoE metrics. In Proceedings of IEEE TMA.
[33]
Ahmed Mansy, Mostafa H. Ammar, Jaideep Chandrashekar, and Anmol Sheth. 2014. Characterizing client behavior of commercial mobile video streaming services. In Proceedings of ACM MoVid.
[34]
Hongzi Mao, Ravi Netravali, and Mohammad Alizadeh. 2017. Neural adaptive video streaming with Pensieve. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM.
[35]
M. Hammad Mazhar and Zubair Shafiq. 2018. Real-time video quality of experience monitoring for HTTPS and QUIC. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM.
[36]
Abhijit Mondal, Satadal Sengupta, Bachu Rikith Reddy, M. J. V. Koundinya, Chander Govindarajan, Pradipta De, Niloy Ganguly, and Sandip Chakraborty. 2017. Candid with YouTube: Adaptive streaming behavior and implications on data consumption. In Proceedings of NOSSDAV.
[37]
Irena Orsolic, Dario Pevec, Mirko Suznjevic, and Lea Skorin-Kapov. 2016. YouTube QoE estimation based on the analysis of encrypted network traffic using machine learning. In Proceedings of IEEE Globecom Workshops.
[38]
Irena Orsolic, Mirko Suznjevic, and Lea Skorin-Kapov. 2018. YouTube QoE estimation from encrypted traffic: Comparison of test methodologies and machine learning based models. In Proceedings of QoMEX. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--6.
[39]
Stefano Petrangeli, Tingyao Wu, Tim Wauters, Rafael Huysegems, Tom Bostoen, and Filip De Turck. 2017. A machine learning-based framework for preventing video freezes in HTTP adaptive streaming. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 94 (2017), 78--92.
[40]
Abbas Razaghpanah, Arian Akhavan Niaki, Narseo Vallina-Rodriguez, Srikanth Sundaresan, Johanna Amann, and Phillipa Gill. 2017. Studying TLS usage in Android apps. In Proceedings of ACM CoNEXT.
[41]
Andrew Reed and Michael Kranch. 2017. Identifying HTTPS-protected Netflix videos in real-time. In Proceedings of CODASPY.
[42]
Paul Schmitt, Francesco Bronzino, Renata Teixeira, Tithi Chattopadhyay, and Nick Feamster. 2018. Enhancing transparency: Internet video quality inference from network traffic. In Proceedings of TPRC46.
[43]
Susanna Schwarzmann, Clarissa Cassales Marquezan, Marcin Bosk, Huiran Liu, Riccardo Trivisonno, and Thomas Zinner. 2019. Estimating video streaming QoE in the 5G architecture using machine learning. In Proceedings of the ACM MobiCom Internet-QoE Workshop.
[44]
Michael Seufert, Pedro Casas, Nikolas Wehner, Li Gang, and Kuang Li. 2019. Features that matter: Feature selection for on-line stalling prediction in encrypted video streaming. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM Network Intelligence: Machine Learning for Networking Workshop.
[45]
Thomas Stockhammer. 2011. Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP: Standards and design principles. In Proceedings of ACM MMSys.
[46]
Dimitrios Tsilimantos, Theodoros Karagkioules, and Stefan Valentin. 2018. Classifying flows and buffer state for YouTube’s HTTP adaptive streaming service in mobile networks. arXiv:1803.00303.
[47]
Dimitrios Tsilimantos, Theodoros Karagkioules, and Stefan Valentin. 2018. Classifying flows and buffer state for YouTube’s HTTP adaptive streaming service in mobile networks. In Proceedings of ACM MMSys.
[48]
Vladislav Vasilev, Jérémie Leguay, Stefano Paris, Lorenzo Maggi, and Mérouane Debbah. 2018. Predicting QoE factors with machine learning. In Proceedings of IEEE ICC.
[49]
Nick Vogt. 2015. YouTube Audio Quality Bitrate Used for 360p, 480p, 720p, 1080p, 1440p, 2160p. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from https://www.h3xed.com/web-and-internet/youtube-audio-quality-bitrate-240p-360p-480p-720p-1080p.
[50]
Florian Wamser, Michael Seufert, Pedro Casas, Ralf Irmer, Phuoc Tran-Gia, and Raimund Schatz. 2015. YoMoApp: A tool for analyzing QoE of YouTube HTTP adaptive streaming in mobile networks. In Proceedings of EuCNC.
[51]
Sarah Wassermann, Michael Seufert, Pedro Casas, Li Gang, and Kuang Li. 2019. I see what you see: Real time prediction of video quality from encrypted streaming traffic. In Proceedings of the ACM MobiCom Internet-QoE Workshop.
[52]
Nicolas Weil. n.d. The State of MPEG-DASH 2016. Retrieved May 15, 2020 from http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Articles/The-State-of-MPEG-DASH-2016-110099.aspx.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Quality of Experience-Oriented Cloud-Edge Dynamic Adaptive Streaming: Recent Advances, Challenges, and OpportunitiesSymmetry10.3390/sym1702019417:2(194)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2025
  • (2025)Estimating QoE from Encrypted Video Conferencing TrafficSensors10.3390/s2504100925:4(1009)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2025
  • (2024)Measuring GenAI Usage Patterns in a University Campus via Network Traffic AnalysisProceedings of the Asian Internet Engineering Conference 202410.1145/3674213.3674214(1-9)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications
ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications  Volume 16, Issue 2s
Special Issue on Smart Communications and Networking for Future Video Surveillance and Special Section on Extended MMSYS-NOSSDAV 2019 Best Papers
April 2020
291 pages
ISSN:1551-6857
EISSN:1551-6865
DOI:10.1145/3407689
Issue’s Table of Contents
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: 10 July 2020
Online AM: 07 May 2020
Accepted: 01 April 2020
Revised: 01 March 2020
Received: 01 December 2019
Published in TOMM Volume 16, Issue 2s

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. HTTP adaptive streaming
  2. Machine learning

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)85
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Quality of Experience-Oriented Cloud-Edge Dynamic Adaptive Streaming: Recent Advances, Challenges, and OpportunitiesSymmetry10.3390/sym1702019417:2(194)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2025
  • (2025)Estimating QoE from Encrypted Video Conferencing TrafficSensors10.3390/s2504100925:4(1009)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2025
  • (2024)Measuring GenAI Usage Patterns in a University Campus via Network Traffic AnalysisProceedings of the Asian Internet Engineering Conference 202410.1145/3674213.3674214(1-9)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Zenith: Real-time Identification of DASH Encrypted Video Traffic with DistortionProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia10.1145/3664647.3680695(7200-7209)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Identifying Video Resolution from Encrypted QUIC Streams in Segment-combined Transmission ScenariosProceedings of the 34th edition of the Workshop on Network and Operating System Support for Digital Audio and Video10.1145/3651863.3651883(50-56)Online publication date: 15-Apr-2024
  • (2024)An Empirical Study of QoE Estimation for Video Streaming Services Using Crowdsourcing2024 IEEE 35th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC)10.1109/PIMRC59610.2024.10817196(1-6)Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Measuring Video QoE from Encrypted Traffic: A Collaborative Approach Using Machine Learning and Stalling Detection2024 IEEE 32nd International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP)10.1109/ICNP61940.2024.10858562(1-6)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Quality of Experience Assessment of Over the Top Services2024 4th International Conference on Blockchain Technology and Information Security (ICBCTIS)10.1109/ICBCTIS64495.2024.00031(145-149)Online publication date: 17-Aug-2024
  • (2024)In-Band Quality Notification from Users to ISPs2024 IEEE 13th International Conference on Cloud Networking (CloudNet)10.1109/CloudNet62863.2024.10815908(1-7)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2024
  • (2024)QoE Estimation Method with Time-series Features Extracted from Packet Flows for Video Streaming2024 IEEE 21st Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC)10.1109/CCNC51664.2024.10454672(1-6)Online publication date: 6-Jan-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media