[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3427796.3427840acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicdcnConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Characterising Proxy Usage in the Bitcoin Peer-to-Peer Network

Published: 05 January 2021 Publication History

Abstract

In the public mind, Bitcoin has often been associated with censorship circumvention and evasion of surveillance measures, specifically in the context of monetary transactions. However, this perceived anonymity is a false sense of security as both on-chain transactions and the underlying message exchange in the peer-to-peer network are attack vectors for deanonymisation and monitoring, as shown in other research. Nonetheless, there has been an increase in Bitcoin usage not only for end-users but also in the context of cybercrime in the form of cryptojacking and ransomware. So there are a number of reasons why proxies might be used in the Bitcoin network, either as a privacy-preserving measure of end-users or as obfuscation in cybercrime.
In this paper, we present a measurement study with the goal of characterising the proxy and VPN usage in the Bitcoin peer-to-peer network. We developed YABA (Yet Another Bitcoin Analyser) to gather network data in a geographically distributed fashion and analyse it. We describe our techniques to infer proxy/VPN usage and load on the peer through different latency measurements and the limitations of our approaches. We utilise port scanning of standard proxy/VPN service ports to compare results. We deployed our infrastructure on three continents (4 workers) and continuously crawled the network, with a total of 26.9 million connection attempts over five days. We conclude the usage of proxies to be minimal, with an estimated 0.4% of peers detected through latency measurements. Similar prevalence was measured through the use of port scans with SOCKS port hitrate at 0.3%, while common VPN ports had hitrates between 0.18% and 0.7%.

References

[1]
Alex Biryukov, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Ivan Pustogarov. 2014. Deanonymisation of clients in Bitcoin P2P network. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, ACM, 15–29.
[2]
Jeremiah Bohr and Masooda Bashir. 2014. Who uses bitcoin? an exploration of the bitcoin community. In 2014 Twelfth Annual International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust. IEEE, 94–101.
[3]
Domhnall Carlin, Jonah Burgess, Philip O’Kane, and Sakir Sezer. 2019. You could be mine (d): the rise of cryptojacking. IEEE Security & Privacy 18, 2 (2019), 16–22.
[4]
Global Legal Research Center. 2018. Regulation of Cryptocurrency Around the World. The Law Library of Congress(2018).
[5]
Christian Decker and Roger Wattenhofer. 2013. Information propagation in the bitcoin network. In IEEE P2P 2013 Proceedings. IEEE, 1–10.
[6]
Sergi Delgado-Segura, Surya Bakshi, Cristina Perez-Sola, James Litton, Andrew Pachulski, Andrew Miller, and Bobby Bhattacharjee. 2019. TxProbe: Discovering Bitcoin’s network topology using orphan transactions. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 550–566.
[7]
Joan Antoni Donet Donet, Cristina Pérez-Sola, and Jordi Herrera-Joancomartí. 2014. The bitcoin P2P network. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 87–102.
[8]
David L Donoho, Ana Georgina Flesia, Umesh Shankar, Vern Paxson, Jason Coit, and Stuart Staniford. 2002. Multiscale stepping-stone detection: Detecting pairs of jittered interactive streams by exploiting maximum tolerable delay. In International Workshop on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Springer, 17–35.
[9]
Marc Dupuis, Tamara Geiger, Marshelle Slayton, and Frances Dewing. 2019. The Use and Non-Use of Cybersecurity Tools Among Consumers: Do They Want Help?. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual SIG Conference on Information Technology Education. ACM, 81–86.
[10]
Guillermo Escobero Hernández. 2019. Characterization of the topology of the Bitcoin network. B.S. thesis. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
[11]
Sebastian Feld, Mirco Schönfeld, and Martin Werner. 2014. Analyzing the Deployment of Bitcoin’s P2P Network under an AS-level Perspective. Procedia Computer Science 32 (2014), 1121–1126.
[12]
Matthias Grundmann, Till Neudecker, and Hannes Hartenstein. 2018. Exploiting transaction accumulation and double spends for topology inference in bitcoin. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 113–126.
[13]
Ivan Hernandez, Masooda Bashir, Gahyun Jeon, and Jeremiah Bohr. 2014. Are Bitcoin Users Less Sociable? An analysis of users’ language and social connections on twitter. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 26–31.
[14]
Geng Hong, Zhemin Yang, Sen Yang, Lei Zhang, Yuhong Nan, Zhibo Zhang, Min Yang, Yuan Zhang, Zhiyun Qian, and Haixin Duan. 2018. How you get shot in the back: A systematical study about cryptojacking in the real world. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, 1701–1713.
[15]
Muhammad Anas Imtiaz, David Starobinski, Ari Trachtenberg, and Nabeel Younis. 2019. Churn in the Bitcoin Network: Characterization and impact. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC). IEEE, 431–439.
[16]
Irni Eliana Khairuddin, Corina Sas, Sarah Clinch, and Nigel Davies. 2016. Exploring motivations for bitcoin technology usage. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2872–2878.
[17]
Mohammad Taha Khan, Joe DeBlasio, Geoffrey M Voelker, Alex C Snoeren, Chris Kanich, and Narseo Vallina-Rodriguez. 2018. An empirical analysis of the commercial vpn ecosystem. In Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018. ACM, 443–456.
[18]
Katharina Krombholz, Aljosha Judmayer, Matthias Gusenbauer, and Edgar Weippl. 2016. The other side of the coin: User experiences with bitcoin security and privacy. In International conference on financial cryptography and data security. Springer, 555–580.
[19]
Matthias Lischke and Benjamin Fabian. 2016. Analyzing the bitcoin network: The first four years. Future Internet 8, 1 (2016), 7.
[20]
Andrew Miller, James Litton, Andrew Pachulski, Neal Gupta, Dave Levin, Neil Spring, and Bobby Bhattacharjee. 2015. Discovering bitcoin’s public topology and influential nodes. et al (2015).
[21]
Satoshi Nakamoto 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. (2008).
[22]
Daniel Stutzbach and Reza Rejaie. 2005. Evaluating the accuracy of captured snapshots by peer-to-peer crawlers. In International Workshop on Passive and Active Network Measurement. Springer, 353–357.
[23]
Wikileaks. 2012. Twitter. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/234727069282607104
[24]
Aaron Yelowitz and Matthew Wilson. 2015. Characteristics of Bitcoin users: an analysis of Google search data. Applied Economics Letters 22, 13 (2015), 1030–1036.
[25]
Yin Zhang and Vern Paxson. 2000. Detecting stepping stones. In USENIX Security Symposium, Vol. 171. 184.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Proliferation of the Service-centric Distributed Consensus Model and its Impact on Ethereum2024 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC)10.1109/ICBC59979.2024.10634450(1-6)Online publication date: 27-May-2024
  • (2022)Gotta Catch’em All! Improving P2P Network Crawling StrategiesDigital Forensics and Cyber Crime10.1007/978-3-031-06365-7_19(313-327)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2022

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
ICDCN '21: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking
January 2021
252 pages
ISBN:9781450389334
DOI:10.1145/3427796
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 the author(s) 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: 05 January 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Bitcoin
  2. Network Measurement
  3. Proxy Detection

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

ICDCN '21

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)146
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)22
Reflects downloads up to 11 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Proliferation of the Service-centric Distributed Consensus Model and its Impact on Ethereum2024 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC)10.1109/ICBC59979.2024.10634450(1-6)Online publication date: 27-May-2024
  • (2022)Gotta Catch’em All! Improving P2P Network Crawling StrategiesDigital Forensics and Cyber Crime10.1007/978-3-031-06365-7_19(313-327)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2022

View Options

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

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media