skip to main content
10.1145/3416012.3424626acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmobicomConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Location Security and Privacy: An LTE Based Approach

Authors Info & Claims
Published:16 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Integrity of location data from smart-phones is essential in several location-dependent applications. Unfortunately it is quite easy to spoof location data on smart phones. Therefore, most mission critical services such as road-side assistance, use location aggregators to supply verified location with user permission. This verified location is purchased from cellular carriers and user permission is required to comply with governmental privacy laws. However, cellular carriers, not aggregators are bound by privacy regulation. Therefore, when there is a breach of confidentiality, as it happened recently in the US, it is the cellular carriers' who were held responsible and must take corrective actions. In this paper, we present a mechanism to obtain location certificates using LTE positioning protocols so that it is possible for cellular carriers to (a) obtain verifiable consent from the mobile user before their location is released, (b) be able to directly provide verified location as a service to businesses rather than selling customer data to third party location aggregators, and (c) enable mobile users to store self-certifiable proofs of their own location to reuse as needed. With this mechanism in place, people can have greater control over their privacy as location-dependent services are assured of integrity.

References

  1. Brian Fung Washington Post. Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint suspend selling of customer location data after prison officials were caught misusing it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/06/19/verizon-will-suspend-sales-of-customer-location-data-after-a-prison-phone-company-was-caught-misusing-it/, June 19 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Y. Jin, M. Tomoishi, and S. Matsuura. 2017 IEEE 41st Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), An In-depth Concealed File System with GPS Authentication Adaptable for Multiple Locations. 1:608--613, July 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. W. B. Hsieh and J. S. Leu. Design of a Time and Location Based One-Time Password Authentication Scheme, 2011 7th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference. pages 201--206, July 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. D. Berbecaru. LRAP: A Location-Based Remote Client Authentication Protocol for Mobile Environments, 2011 19th International Euromicro Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-Based Processing. pages 141--145, Feb 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. L. Bao. Location Authentication Methods for Wireless Network Access Control. In 2008 IEEE International Performance, Computing and Communications Conference, pages 160--167, Dec 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Priyanka Samanta and Shweta Jain. E-witness: Preserve and prove forensic soundness of digital evidence. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pages 832--834, 2018. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Rule 902(13)(14). Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating. Certified Records Generated by an Electronic Process or System. FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE, August 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. LocationSmart. Enterprise Mobility Solution. https://www.locationsmart.com, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Brian Krebs. Tracking Firm LocationSmart Leaked Location Data for Customers of All Major U.S. Mobile Carriers Without Consent in Real Time Via Its Web Site. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/05/tracking-firm-locationsmart-leaked-location-data-for-customers-of-all-major-u-s-mobile-carriers-in-real-time-via-its-web-site/, May 17 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Robert Xiao. LocationSmart API Vulnerability. https://www.robertxiao.ca/hacking/locationsmart/, May 17 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. New York Times. Service Meant to Monitor Inmates? Calls Could Track You, Too. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/technology/cellphone-tracking-law-enforcement.html, May 10 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Zach Wittaker ZDNet. Senator wants to know how police can locate any phone in seconds without a warrant. https://www.zdnet.com/article/securus-police-cell-phones-warrantless-tracking/, May 11 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. David W Chadwick. Federated identity management. In Foundations of security analysis and design V, pages 96--120. Springer, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. George F Riley and Thomas R Henderson. The ns-3 network simulator. In Modeling and tools for network simulation, pages 15--34. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A. I. Gonzalez-Tablas Ferreres, B. Ramos Alvarez, and A. R. Garnacho. Guaranteeing the Authenticity of Location Information. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 7(3):72--80, July 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Skyhook Wireless. Location Technology and Intelligence, https://www.skyhookwireless.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. The Google Geolocation API, https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation /geolocation/intro.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Dorothy E. Denning Peter F. MacDoran. Location-Based Authentication: Grounding Cyberspace for Better Security. Elsevier, February 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Bill Gates, Nathan Myhrvold, Peter Rinearson, and Donald Domonkos. The road ahead. 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Addison M Fischer. Method for Providing Location Certificates, August 19 1997. US Patent 5,659,617.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Stefan Saroiu and Alec Wolman. Enabling New Mobile Applications with Location Proofs. In Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, HotMobile '09, pages 3:1--3:6, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Rubin Xu and Dongting Yu. Towards a Stronger Location Integrity. In Cambridge International Workshop on Security Protocols, pages 176--179. Springer, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. W. Wang, Y. Chen, and Q. Zhang. Privacy-Preserving Location Authentication in Wi-Fi Networks Using Fine-Grained Physical Layer Signatures. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 15(2):1218--1225, Feb 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. T. Sherman, D. Phatak, B. Sonawane, and V. G. Relan. Location Authentication Through Power Line Communication: Design, Protocol, and Analysis of a New Out-of-Band Strategy. In ISPLC2010, pages 279--284, March 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Bernard Wong, Ivan Stoyanov, and Emin Gün Sirer. Geolocalization on the Internet Through Constraint Satisfaction. In WORLDS, volume 6, pages 1--1, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. I. Niang, B. Gueye, and B. Kasse. GeoHybrid: A Hierarchical Approach for Accurate and Scalable Geographic Localization. In 2010 ITU-T Kaleidoscope: Beyond the Internet? - Innovations for Future Networks and Services, pages 1--8, Dec 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. J. Brassil, P. K. Manadhata, and R. Netravali. Traffic Signature-Based Mobile Device Location Authentication. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 13(9):2156--2169, Sept 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. R. Netravali and J. Brassil. Femtocell-Assisted Location Authentication. In 2011 18th IEEE Workshop on Local Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN), pages 1--2, Oct 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. S. Gambs, M. O. Killijian, M. Roy, and M. Traoré. PROPS: A PRrivacy-Preserving Location Proof System. In 2014 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pages 1--10, Oct 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. L. Hua and J. Dai. A Location Authentication Scheme Based on Adjacent Users. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Progress in Informatics and Computing, pages 158--162, May 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. C. M. Chen, X. Zhang, and T. Y. Wu. A Secure Condition-Based Location Authentication Protocol for Mobile Devices. In 2016 Third International Conference on Computing Measurement Control and Sensor Network (CMCSN), pages 146--149, May 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. S. Arunkumar, M. Srivatsa, M. Sensoy, and M. Rajarajan. Global Attestation of Location in Mobile Devices. In MILCOM 2015 - 2015 IEEE Military Communications Conference, pages 1612--1617, Oct 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Z. Zhu and G. Cao. APPLAUS: A Privacy-Preserving Location Proof Updating System for Location-Based Services. In 2011 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM, pages 1889--1897, April 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. 3GPP TS 36.355 V14.5.1 (2018-04) Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); LTE Positioning Protocol (LPP) (Release 14).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Ronghai Yang, Wing Cheong Lau, and Tianyu Liu. Signing into one billion mobile app accounts effortlessly with oauth2. 0. Black Hat Europe, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. 3GPP TS 36.455 V14.4.0 (2017--12) Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); LTE Positioning Protocol A (LPPa) (Release 14).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ana Isabel González-Tablas Ferreres, Benjamin Ramos Álvarez, and Arturo Ribagorda Garnacho. Spatial-Temporal Certification Framework and Extension of X. 509 Attribute Certificate Framework and SAML Standard to Support Spatial-Temporal Certificates. In European Public Key Infrastructure Workshop, pages 321--329. Springer, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Nicola Baldo, Marco Miozzo, Manuel Requena-Esteso, and Jaume Nin-Guerrero. An open source product-oriented lte network simulator based on ns-3. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Modeling, analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems, pages 293--298, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. George Kingsley Zipf. Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Addison-Wesley press, 1949.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jiakai Yu, Tingjun Chen, Craig Gutterman, Shengxiang Zhu, Gil Zussman, Ivan Seskar, and Daniel Kilper. Cosmos: Optical architecture and prototyping. In Optical Fiber Communication Conference. Optical Society of America, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Location Security and Privacy: An LTE Based Approach

      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
        MobiWac '20: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Mobility Management and Wireless Access
        November 2020
        148 pages
        ISBN:9781450381192
        DOI:10.1145/3416012

        Copyright © 2020 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 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: 16 November 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate83of272submissions,31%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)29
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader