Vulnerability in socially-informed peer-to-peer systems

The recent increase in the volume of recorded social interactions has the potential to enable a large class of innovative social applications and services. The decentralized management of such social information as a social graph distributed on a user-contributed peer-to-peer network is appealing due to privacy concerns. This paper studies the vulnerability of such a peer-to-peer system to attacks staged by malicious users who try to manipulate the graph or by malicious peers who try to manipulate the mining of the social graph. We discuss the effects and limitations of such attacks and we show experimentally how the distribution of the social data onto peers affects the system's resilience.

[1]  Refik Molva,et al.  Safebook: A privacy-preserving online social network leveraging on real-life trust , 2009, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[2]  Alexandru Iosup,et al.  TRIBLER: a social-based peer-to-peer system: Research Articles , 2008 .

[3]  Mary Baker,et al.  The LOCKSS peer-to-peer digital preservation system , 2005, TOCS.

[4]  Paul Anderson,et al.  Prometheus: User-Controlled P2P Social Data Management for Socially-Aware Applications , 2010, Middleware.

[5]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Exploiting Social Networks for Internet Search , 2006, HotNets.

[6]  Paul Anderson,et al.  On managing social data for enabling socially-aware applications and services , 2010, SNS '10.

[7]  Marco Gonzalez,et al.  Author's Personal Copy Social Networks Tastes, Ties, and Time: a New Social Network Dataset Using Facebook.com , 2022 .

[8]  Ramón Cáceres,et al.  Vis-à-Vis: Privacy-preserving online social networking via Virtual Individual Servers , 2011, 2011 Third International Conference on Communication Systems and Networks (COMSNETS 2011).

[9]  Hawoong Jeong,et al.  Comparison of online social relations in volume vs interaction: a case study of cyworld , 2008, IMC '08.

[10]  A. Vázquez.  Growing network with local rules: preferential attachment, clustering hierarchy, and degree correlations. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Ostra: Leveraging Trust to Thwart Unwanted Communication , 2008, NSDI.

[12]  Sonja Buchegger,et al.  PeerSoN: P2P social networking: early experiences and insights , 2009, SNS '09.

[13]  Michael Kaminsky,et al.  SybilGuard: Defending Against Sybil Attacks via Social Networks , 2008, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[14]  S. D. Berkowitz,et al.  Social Structures: A Network Approach , 1989 .

[15]  Andrew S. Tanenbaum,et al.  Safe and Private Data Sharing with Turtle: Friends Team-Up and Beat the System , 2004, Security Protocols Workshop.

[16]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  H. Lim,et al.  Vis-à-Vis : Online Social Networking via Virtual Individual Ser vers , 2008 .

[18]  Jinyang Li,et al.  Friendstore: cooperative online backup using trusted nodes , 2008, SocialNets '08.

[19]  Michael Kaminsky,et al.  SybilGuard: defending against sybil attacks via social networks , 2006, SIGCOMM.

[20]  Jun Wang,et al.  TRIBLER: a social‐based peer‐to‐peer system , 2008, IPTPS.

[21]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  Measurement-calibrated graph models for social network experiments , 2010, WWW '10.

[22]  Noah E. Friedkin,et al.  Horizons of Observability and Limits of Informal Control in Organizations , 1983 .

[23]  B. Wellman.  Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. , 1988 .