Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2011 - Telex - Anti Censorship in the Network Infrastructure

2011 - Telex - Anti Censorship in the Network Infrastructure

Ratings: (0)|Views: 545|Likes:
Published by Franck Dernoncourt

More info:

Published by: Franck Dernoncourt on Jul 18, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





To appear in
Proc. 20th Usenix Security Symposium
(Usenix Security), August 2011.For updates, source code, and an online demonstration, visithttps:// 
Telex: Anticensorship in the Network Infrastructure
Eric Wustrow
Scott Wolchok 
Ian Goldberg
J.Alex Halderman
The University of Michigan
University of Waterloo
In this paper, we present Telex, a new approach toresisting state-level Internet censorship. Rather than at-
tempting to win the cat-and-mouse game of finding openproxies, we leverage censors’ unwillingness to completelyblock day-to-day Internet access. In effect, Telex convertsinnocuous, unblocked websites into proxies,
explicit collaboration. We envision that friendly ISPswould deploy Telex stations on paths between censors’networks and popular, uncensored Internet destinations.
Telex stations would monitor seemingly innocuous flows
for a special “tag” and transparently divert them to a for-bidden website or service instead. We propose a new
cryptographic scheme based on elliptic curves for tagging
TLS handshakes such that the tag is visible to a Telex
station but not to a censor. In addition, we use our tagging
scheme to build a protocol that allows clients to connect
to Telex stations while resisting both passive and active at-tacks. We also present a proof-of-concept implementation
that demonstrates the feasibility of our system.
1 Introduction
The events of the Arab Spring have vividly demonstrated
the Internet’s power to catalyze social change throughthe free exchange of ideas, news, and other information.
The Internet poses such an existential threat to repressive
regimes that some have completely disconnected from
the global network during periods of intense political un-rest, and many regimes are pursuing aggressive programs
of Internet censorship using increasingly sophisticated
Today, the most widely-used tools for circumventingInternet censorship take the form of encrypted tunnelsand proxies, such as Dynaweb [12], Instasurf [30], and Tor [10]. While these designs can be quite effective at
sneaking client connections past the censor, these systems
inevitably lead to a cat-and-mouse game in which thecensor attempts to discover and block the services’ IPaddresses. For example, Tor has recently observed theblocking of entry nodes and directory servers in China
and Iran[28]. Though Tor is used to skirt Internet censors
in these countries, it was not originally designed for thatapplication. While it may certainly achieve its originalgoal of anonymity for its users, it appears that Tor andproxies like it are ultimately not enough to circumvent
aggressive censorship.
To overcome this problem, we propose
: an “end-
to-middle” proxy with no IP address, located within the
network infrastructure. Clients invoke the proxy by using
public-key steganography to “tag” otherwise ordinary
TLS sessions destined for uncensored websites. Its design
is unique in several respects:
Previous designs have assumed that anti-censorship services would be provided by hosts at the
edge of the network, as the end-to-end principle requires.
We propose instead to provide these services in the coreinfrastructure of the Internet, along paths between thecensor’s network and popular, nonblocked destinations.We argue that this will provide both lower latency and
increased resistance to blocking.
Many systems attempt to combat state-level censorship using resources provided primarily byvolunteers. Instead, we investigate a government-scaleresponse based on the view that state-level censorship
needs to be combated by state-level anticensorship.
We show how a technique that the security
and privacy literature most frequently associates withgovernment surveillance—deep-packet inspection—can
provide the foundation for a robust anticensorship system.We expect that these design choices will be somewhat
controversial, and we hope that they will lead to discus-sion about the future development of anticensorship sys-
Contributions and roadmap
We propose using “end-
to-middle” proxies built into the Internet’s network in-frastructure as a novel approach to resisting state-levelcensorship. We elaborate on this concept and sketch thedesign of our system in Section2,and we discuss its
relation to previous work in Section3.
We develop a new steganographic tagging schemebased on elliptic curve cryptography, and we use it toconstruct a modified version of the TLS protocol thatallows clients to connect to our proxy. We describe the
tagging scheme in Section4and the protocol in Section5.
We analyze the protocol’s security in Section6.
We present a proof-of-concept implementation of ourapproach and protocols, and we support its feasibility
through laboratory experiments and real-world tests. We
describe our implementation in Section7, and we evaluate
its performance in Section8.
Online resources
For the most recent version of thispaper, prototype source code, and a live demonstration,
2 Concept
Telex operates as what we term an “end-to-middle” proxy.Whereas in traditional end-to-end proxying the client con-
nects to a server that relays data to a specified host, inend-to-middle proxying an intermediary along the pathto a server redirects part of the connection payload toan alternative destination. One example of this mode of operation is Tor’s leaky-pipe circuit topology[10]fea-ture, which allows traffic to exit from the middle of a
constructed Tor circuit rather than the end.
The Telex concept is to build end-to-middle proxying
capabilities into the Internet’s routing infrastructure. Thiswould let clients invoke proxying by establishing connec-
tions to normal, pre-existing servers. By applying thisidea to a widely used encrypted transport, such as TLS,and carefully avoiding observable deviations from thebehavior of nonproxied connections, we can construct a
service that allows users to robustly bypass network-level
censorship without being detected.
In the remainder of this section, we define a threatmodel and goals for the Telex system. We then give a
sketch of the design and discuss several practical consid-
2.1 Threat model
Our adversary, “the censor”, is a repressive state-level au-thority that desires to inhibit online access to information
and communication of certain ideas. These desires are
realized by IP and DNS blacklists as well as heuristics for
blocking connections based on their observed content.
We note that the censor still has some motivation forconnecting to the Internet at all, such as the economic
and social benefits of connectivity. Thus, the censor bears
some cost from over-blocking. We assume that the cen-sor follows a blacklist approach rather than a whitelistapproach in blocking, allowing traffic to pass through
unchanged unless it is explicitly banned.Furthermore, we assume that the censor generally per-
mits widespread cryptographic protocols, such as TLS, ex-cept when it has reason to believe a particular connection
is being used for skirting censorship. We further assume
that the censor is not subverting such protocols on a wide
scale, such as by requiring a cryptographic backdoor or
by issuing false TLS certificates using a country-wide CA.
We believe this is reasonable, as blocking or subverting
TLS on a wide scale would render most modern websites
unusably insecure. Subversion in particular would result
in an increased risk of large-scale fraud if the back door
were compromised or abused by corrupt insiders.
The censor controls the infrastructure of the network within its jurisdiction (“the censor’s network”), and itcan potentially monitor, block, alter, and inject trafficanywhere within this region. However, these abilitiesare subject to realistic technical, economic, and political
In general, the censor does
control end hosts within
its network, which operate under the direction of theirusers. We believe this assumption is reasonable based
on the failure of recent attempts by national governmentsto mandate client-side filtering software, such as China’s
Green Dam Youth Escort [33]. The censor might target
a small subset of users and seize control of their devices,
either through overt compulsion or covert technical at-tacks. Protecting these users is beyond the scope of oursystem. However, the censor’s targeting users on a wide
scale might have unacceptable political costs.
Thecensorhasverylimitedabilitiesoutsideitsnetwork.It does not control any external network infrastructure or
any popular external websites the client may use whencommunicating with Telex stations. The censor can, of course, buy or rent hosting outside its network, but itsuse is largely subject to the policies of the provider and
Some governments may choose to deny their citizensInternet connectivity altogether, or disconnect entirelyin times of crisis. These are outside our threat model;the best approaches to censors like these likely involvedifferent approaches than ours, and entail much steeperperformance trade-offs. Instead, our goal is to make ac-
cess to any part of the global Internet sufficient to accessevery part of it. In other words, we aim to make connect-ing to the global Internet an all-or-nothing proposition for
national governments.2
Figure 1:
Telex Concept
This figure shows an example user connecting to Telex. The client makes a taggedconnection to NotBlocked.com, which is passed by the censor’s filter. When the request reaches a friendly on-pathISP, one of the ISP’s routers forwards the request to the Telex station connected to its tap interface. Telex deciphersthe tag, instructs the router to block the connection to NotBlocked.com and diverts the connection to Blocked.com,as the user secretly requested. If the connection was not tagged, Telex would not intervene, and it would proceed to
NotBlocked.com as normal.
2.2 Goals
Telex should satisfy the following properties:
The censor should not be able to deny
service to Telex without incurring unacceptable costs. In
particular, we require that the censor cannot block Telex
without blocking a large, primarily legitimate category of 
Internet traffic.
The censor should not be able to deter-mine whether a user is using Telex or what content the
user is accessing through the system.
Easy to deploy
The consequences of Telex system
failure (or even normal operation) must not interfere with
normal network operation (e.g., non-Telex connections)
in order for deployment to be palatable to ISPs.
Transparent to users
Using Telex should, possibly
after a small startup procedure, closely resemble using an
unfiltered Internet connection.
2.3 Design
To meet our goals and the constraints imposed by ourthreat model, we propose the design shown in Figure1.As illustrated in the figure, a Telex connection proceeds
as follows:1. The user’s client selects an appropriate website that
is not on the censor’s blacklist and unlikely to at-tract attention, which we represent by the domain
The user connects to NotBlocked.com via HTTPS.Her Telex client
includes an invisible “tag,” whichlooks like an expected random nonce to the censor,but can be cryptographically verified by the Telex
station using its private key.3.
Somewhere along the route between the client andNotBlocked.com, the connection traverses an ISP
that has agreed to attach a Telex station to one of its
routers. The connection is forwarded to the station
via a dedicated tap interface.4.
The station detects the tag and instructs the router toblock the connection from passing through it, while
still forwarding packets to the station through its
dedicated tap. (Unlike a deployment based on trans-
parent proxying, this configuration
fails open
: it
tolerates the failure of the entire Telex system and so
meets our goal of being easy to deploy.)5.
The Telex station diverts the flow to Blocked.com as
We anticipate that client software will be distributed out of band,
perhaps by sneakernet, among mutually trusting individuals within the
censor’s domain.

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
ddaju liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->