Feeds

Crypto-boffins propose safer buddy list protocol

Presence services with less privacy risk

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

One of the attractions of presence in communications services is that you know someone's available before you try to contact them. The flipside is that presence is also inimical to privacy. Now, a group of researchers has put forward a way to improve privacy of “buddy lists” but still allowing friends to know each others' presence.

Outlined in this paper, the presence system, referred to as DP5, has been developed by boffins from the University of Illinois, University College London, and the University of Waterloo in Canada.

DP5 proposes a mechanism in which users' buddy lists are encrypted but can still be interrogated. As they explain, the system also protects users against having their buddy lists compromised in case of an attack against a service: “While infrastructure services are required for DP5 to operate, they are designed to not require any long-term secrets and provide perfect forward secrecy in case of compromise”.

That's because the encryption of the presence information prevents the service from learning private information like users' lists of friends.

The paper also notes that with the experience of Lavabit and the Snowden revelations as examples, it's probably a good idea for anyone trying to pitch a “secure online messaging” service to avoid collecting privacy-sensitive metadata.

The basis of registering someone as a friend is simple: instead of a central server holding user IDs and building a topology of connections between users, individual users use each others' crypto keys to send, receive, and approve friend connections.

Because the server has to know something about relationships, what's stored in the database is a crypto key indicating a user's “directed friend link”. This, however, is not a permanent record of the link: periodically, each user's client will regenerate the keys the system stores: “Alice picks a random private key … and derives a fresh public key. Then for each of her friends, she derives the shared key for the long-term epoch, and encodes a database entry comprising an identifier, and a ciphertext of her fresh public key.” ®

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
George Clooney, WikiLeaks' lawyer wife hand out burner phones to wedding guests
Day 4: 'News'-papers STILL rammed with Clooney nuptials
Shellshock: 'Larger scale attack' on its way, warn securo-bods
Not just web servers under threat - though TENS of THOUSANDS have been hit
Apple's new iPhone 6 vulnerable to last year's TouchID fingerprint hack
But unsophisticated thieves need not attempt this trick
PEAK IPV4? Global IPv6 traffic is growing, DDoS dying, says Akamai
First time the cache network has seen drop in use of 32-bit-wide IP addresses
Oracle SHELLSHOCKER - data titan lists unpatchables
Database kingpin lists 32 products that can't be patched (yet) as GNU fixes second vuln
Researchers tell black hats: 'YOU'RE SOOO PREDICTABLE'
Want to register that domain? We're way ahead of you.
Stunned by Shellshock Bash bug? Patch all you can – or be punished
UK data watchdog rolls up its sleeves, polishes truncheon
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The next step in data security
With recent increased privacy concerns and computers becoming more powerful, the chance of hackers being able to crack smaller-sized RSA keys increases.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.