Abstract
When people utilize social applications and services, their privacy suffers a potential serious threat. In this article, we present a novel, robust, and effective de-anonymization attack to mobility trace data and social data. First, we design a Unified Similarity (US) measurement, which takes account of local and global structural characteristics of data, information obtained from auxiliary data, and knowledge inherited from ongoing de-anonymization results. By analyzing the measurement on real datasets, we find that some data can potentially be de-anonymized accurately and the other can be de-anonymized in a coarse granularity. Utilizing this property, we present a US-based De-Anonymization (DA) framework, which iteratively de-anonymizes data with accuracy guarantee. Then, to de-anonymize large-scale data without knowledge of the overlap size between the anonymized data and the auxiliary data, we generalize DA to an Adaptive De-Anonymization (ADA) framework. By smartly working on two core matching subgraphs, ADA achieves high de-anonymization accuracy and reduces computational overhead. Finally, we examine the presented de-anonymization attack on three well-known mobility traces: St Andrews, Infocom06, and Smallblue, and three social datasets: ArnetMiner, Google+, and Facebook. The experimental results demonstrate that the presented de-anonymization framework is very effective and robust to noise.
The source code and employed datasets are now publicly available at SecGraph [2015].
- L. Alvisi, A. Clement, A. Epasto, S. Lattanzi, and A. Panconesi. 2013. SoK: The evolution of Sybil defense via social networks. In S&P. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- L. Backstrom, C. Dwork, and J. Kleinberg. 2007. Wherefore art thou R3579X? Anonymized social networks, hidden patterns, and structural steganography. In WWW. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. C. Basak, V. R. Magnuson, G. J. Niemi, and R. R. Regal. 1988. Determining structural similarity of chemicals using graph-theoretic indices. Discrete Appl. Math. 19 (1988), 17--44. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Bavelas. 1950. Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 22 (1950), 725--730.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- G. Bigwood, D. Rehunathan, M. Bateman, T. Henderson, and S. Bhatti. 2011. CRAWDAD dataset st_andrews/sassy. Retrieved from http:/crawdad.cs.dartmouth.edu/st_andrews/sassy.Google Scholar
- P. Boldi and S. Vigna. 2014. Axioms for centrality. Internet Math. 10, 3--4 (2014), 222--262.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- U. Brandes and J. Lerner. 2004. Structural similarity in graphs: A relaxation approach for role assignment. LNCS 3341 (2004), 184--195. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Campan and T. M. Truta. 2008. A clustering approach for data and structural anonymity in social networks. In PinKDD.Google Scholar
- Centrality. 2015. Centrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrality.Google Scholar
- CRAWDAD. 2014. Retrieved from http://crawdad.cs.dartmouth.edu/.Google Scholar
- M. Egele, C. Kruegel, E. Kirda, and G. Vigna. 2011. PiOS: Detecting privacy leaks in iOS applications. NDSS (2011).Google Scholar
- L. C. Freeeman. 1978. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Netw. 1 (1978), 215--239.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- M. Garg. 2009. Axiomatic foundations of centrality in networks. Social Sci. Res. Netw. (2009), 1--37.Google Scholar
- N. Z. Gong, A. Talwalkar, L. Mackey, L. Huang, E. C. R. Shin, E. Stefanov, E. Shi, and D. Song. 2012a. Jointly predicting links and inferring attributes using a social-attribute network (SAN). In SNA-KDD.Google Scholar
- N. Z. Gong, W. Xu, L. Huang, P. Mittal, E. Stefanov, V. Sekar, and D. Song. 2012b. Evolution of social-attribute networks: Measurements, modeling, and implications using Google+. In IMC. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. Hanneman and M. Riddle. 2005. Introduction to Social Network Methods: Table of Contents. Retrieved from http://faculty.ucr.edu/∼hanneman/nettext/.Google Scholar
- M. Hay, G. Miklau, D. Jensen, D. Towsley, and P. Weis. 2008. Resisting structural re-identification in anonymized social networks. In VLDB. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- P. Hornyack, S. Han, J. Jung, S. Schechter, and D. Wetherall. 2011. These aren’t the droids you’re looking for: Retrofitting android to protect data from imperious applications. In CCS. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. Ji, W. Li, P. Mittal, X. Hu, and R. Beyah. 2014. Structural data de-anonymization: Quantification, practice, and implications. In CCS. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. Ji, W. Li, P. Mittal, X. Hu, and R. Beyah. 2015a. On your social network de-anonymizablity: Quantification and large scale evaluation with seed knowledge. In NDSS.Google Scholar
- S. Ji, W. Li, P. Mittal, X. Hu, and R. Beyah. 2015b. SecGraph: A uniform and open-source evaluation system for graph data anonymization and de-anonymization. In USENIX Security. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Kruskal and M. Wish. 1978. Multidimensional Scaling. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- K. Liu and E. Terzi. 2008. Towards identity anonymization on graphs. SIGMOD (2008). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. McAuley and J. Leskovec. 2012. Learning to discover social circles in ego networks. In NIPS.Google Scholar
- A. Narayanan and V. Shmatikov. 2008. Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets (de-anonymizing the Netflix prize dataset). In S&P. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Narayanan and V. Shmatikov. 2009. De-anonymizing social networks. In S&P. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. E. J. Newman. 2010. Networks: An Introduction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- S. Nilizadeh, A. Kapadia, and Y.-Y. Ahn. 2014. Community-enhanced de-anonymization of online social networks. In CCS. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- T. Opsahl. 2010. Closeness centrality in networks with disconnected components | Tore Opsahl. Retrieved from http://toreopsahl.com/2010/03/20/closeness-centrality-in-networks-with-disconnected-components/.Google Scholar
- T. Opsahl, F. Agneessens, and J. Skvoretz. 2010. Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Netw. 32 (2010), 245--251.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Y. Rochat. 2009. Closeness centrality extended to unconnected graphs: The harmonic centrality index. In ASNA. 1--14.Google Scholar
- J. Scott, R. Gass, J. Crowcroft, P. Hui, C. Diot, and A. Chaintreau. 2009. CRAWDAD dataset cambridge/haggle. Retrieved from http://crawdad.cs.dartmouth.edu/cambridge/haggle.Google Scholar
- SecGraph. 2015. Retrieved from http://www.ece.gatech.edu/cap/secgraph/.Google Scholar
- Similarity. 2015. Similarity (network science) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Similarity\_(network_science).Google Scholar
- K. Singh, S. Bhola, and W. Lee. 2009. xBook: Redesigning privacy control in social networking platforms. In USENIX. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Smallblue. 2009. SmallBlue Research Projects. Retrieved from http://domino.research.ibm.com/comm/research_projects.nsf/pages/smallblue.index.html.Google Scholar
- SNAP. 2014. Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection. Retrieved from http://snap.stanford.edu/data/.Google Scholar
- M. Srivatsa and M. Hicks. 2012. Deanonymizing mobility traces: Using social networks as a side-channel. In CCS. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Tang, J. Zhang, L. Yao, J. Li, L. Zhang, and Z. Su. 2008. ArnetMiner: Extraction and mining of academic social networks. In KDD. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- B. Viswanath, A. N. Mislove, M. Cha, and K. P. Gummadi. 2009. On the evolution of user interaction in facebook. In WOSN. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Yu, P. B. Gibbons, M. Kaminsky, and F. Xiao. 2008a. SybilLimit: A near-optimal social network defense against Sybil attacks. In S&P. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Yu, M. Kaminsky, P. B. Gibbons, and A. D. Flaxman. 2008b. SybilGuard: Defending against Sybil attacks via social networks. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 16, 3 (2008), 576--589. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- H. Yu, C. Shi, M. Kaminsky, P. B. Gibbons, and F. Xiao. 2009. DSybil: Optimal Sybil-resistance for recommendation systems. In S&P. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- E. Zheleva and L. Getoor. 2007. Preserving the privacy of sensitive relationships in graph data. In PinKDD. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Y. Zhou, H. Cheng, and J. X. Yu. 2009. Graph clustering based on structural/attribute similarities. In VLDB. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
General Graph Data De-Anonymization: From Mobility Traces to Social Networks
Recommendations
An Automated Social Graph De-anonymization Technique
WPES '14: Proceedings of the 13th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic SocietyWe present a generic and automated approach to re-identifying nodes in anonymized social networks which enables novel anonymization techniques to be quickly evaluated. It uses machine learning (decision forests) to matching pairs of nodes in disparate ...
Structural Data De-anonymization: Quantification, Practice, and Implications
CCS '14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications SecurityIn this paper, we study the quantification, practice, and implications of structural data (e.g., social data, mobility traces) De-Anonymization (DA). First, we address several open problems in structural data DA by quantifying perfect and (1-ε)-perfect ...
Preserving Utility in Social Network Graph Anonymization
TRUSTCOM '13: Proceedings of the 2013 12th IEEE International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and CommunicationsTo protect from privacy disclosure, the social network graph is modified in order to hide the information that potentially be used to disclose person's identity. However, when the social network graph is changed, it is a great challenge to balance ...






Comments