De-Anonymizing Social Network Users
An anonymous reader writes "The H has an article about some researchers who found a new way to de-anonymize people. Compared to the EFF's Panopticlick, the goal of this experiment is not to identify a user's browser uniquely, but to identify individual users. The test essentially exploits the fact that many social network users are identifiable by their membership of various groups. According to the researchers, it's very unlikelly that two people on any social network will belong to exactly the same groups. A 'group fingerprint' can thus allow websites to identify previously anonymous visitors. They describe the setup and all details and the results look very interesting. They also have a live demo for the social network Xing that was able to de-anonymize me."
Probably not so anonymous anymore!
There is nothing new about this. This is what any human being (a PI, or a stalker) would intuitively try to do. This is just streamlining and automating that process.
So basically if
then an attacker might be able to work out the name you use on that social networking site?
Why would anyone bother. Indexing facebook would take quite a bit of time and resources and at the end of it you'd have something which might or might not be someones real name. Even if it is their real name, what exactly are you going to do with it? So you've unmasked(maybe) the name(maybe) of someone who visited your site. It's not going to give you anything else useful unless you combine it with some other attack vector which could quite easily pick up their real name for free anyway.
I suppose you could use it to set up a honey pot site for people with certain beliefs or interests and use it to accumulate a list of people with those beliefs or interests, but to be honest, you'd probably do better social engineering their ISP to get their account details.
I prefer not to de-anatomized all the Anonymous Cowards. Neutered them, sure. Let's leave it at that.
Billy No-Mates, is that you ?
But worse than that, the paper itself is horribly written, especially the abstract. The threat presented is not de-anonymization within the social network (since usually most profiles are real people anyway) but rather de-anonymization of visitors to arbitrary websites if those visitors also have social networking URLs in their browser history.
Now, the big privacy hole here is browser history stealing, which is four years old. All this paper does is refine this mountain of privacy-invading information using social networking URLs that might be found there.
similarly, the plugins list... another thing that doesn't need to be sent out by the browser...
Firefox devs, you listening here? these do not need to be transmitted so block them...
anyone know of a plugin that blocks them?
and why on earth is it possible to sniff the history list???
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Brilliant plan, guys... except you still left one variable unknown: the aloof guy who doesn't belong to any groups. How do you pick him out of the crowd when he's not in it to begin with? Those aloof loners are always the ones we should be worrying about, right? That's what the movies always say.
They (the authors) keep mentioning it in the same breath as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn - but I've never heard of it (I realize that may not necessarily mean anything). It also seems a bit odd to see the BSD demon in one of the article graphics. I can't help but wonder if this was posted to actually discuss an attack vector against social networking sites, or if it was really some weird attempt to promote some GNU/Free social networking club.
Anyway, it seems to me that demoing a practical de-anonymization of a Facebook user or a LinkedIn profile would be more interesting.
#DeleteChrome
...register with different false data on separate sites
This attack allows for a bit of quasi-de-anonymizing in this case. It doesn't tell you that user "vikingsfan" is real life Eric J. Andersen of Frostbite Falls, MN, but it does tell you that "vikingsfan" on the site is none other than "hockeypuck" on site B, who is also the same person as "moosehead" on site C, etc.
This sounds trivial, but it's of interest to some of us who may not want people on site A to know who we are on site B, when site A is an important social locale for us, even if no one on site A knows our real name (which is probably unimportant to them in any case, it might as well be just another nick...)
Put succinctly, it can expose your alts even if it doesn't expose your RL identity.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
All you have to do is post a stupid little survey to Facebook and millions of idiots will fill the silly thing out giving you their mother's maiden name, street they grew up on, and last 4 digits of their social security in return for generating a few sentences of nonsense.