Modeling and Analysis of Leaky Deception Using Signaling Games With Evidence

Deception plays critical roles in economics and technology, especially in emerging interactions in cyberspace. Holistic models of deception are needed in order to analyze interactions and to design mechanisms that improve them. Game theory provides such models. In particular, existing work models deception using signaling games. But signaling games inherently model deception that is undetectable. In this paper, we extend signaling games by including a detector that gives off probabilistic warnings when the sender acts deceptively. Then, we derive pooling and partially separating equilibria of the game. We find that: 1) high quality detectors eliminate some pure-strategy equilibria; 2) detectors with high true-positive rates encourage more honest signaling than detectors with low false-positive rates; 3) receivers obtain optimal outcomes for equal-error-rate detectors; and 4) surprisingly, deceptive senders sometimes benefit from highly accurate deception detectors. We illustrate these results with an application to defensive deception for network security. Our results provide a quantitative and rigorous analysis of the fundamental aspects of detectable deception.

[1]  Viliam Lisý,et al.  Game-Theoretic Foundations for the Strategic Use of Honeypots in Network Security , 2015, Cyber Warfare.

[2]  Quanyan Zhu,et al.  Strategic Trust in Cloud-Enabled Cyber-Physical Systems With an Application to Glucose Control , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[3]  Claire Cardie,et al.  Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination , 2011, ACL.

[4]  James Edwin Mahon,et al.  The Definition of Lying and Deception , 2015 .

[5]  Quanyan Zhu,et al.  Deception by Design: Evidence-Based Signaling Games for Network Defense , 2015, WEIS.

[6]  Antonio Iera,et al.  The Internet of Things: A survey , 2010, Comput. Networks.

[7]  J. Harsanyi Games with Incomplete Information Played by 'Bayesian' Players, Part III. The Basic Probability Distribution of the Game , 1968 .

[8]  Tamer Başar,et al.  Information-Theoretic Approach to Strategic Communication as a Hierarchical Game , 2015, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[9]  John C. Harsanyi,et al.  Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III: Part I. The Basic Model& , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[10]  Ray Bull,et al.  Increasing Cognitive Load to Facilitate Lie Detection: The Benefit of Recalling an Event in Reverse Order , 2008, Law and human behavior.

[11]  J. Sobel,et al.  STRATEGIC INFORMATION TRANSMISSION , 1982 .

[12]  Lech J. Janczewski,et al.  Cyber Warfare and Cyber Terrorism , 2007 .

[13]  Oliver Hart,et al.  Disclosure Laws and Takeover Bids , 1980 .

[14]  Ping Chen,et al.  A Study on Advanced Persistent Threats , 2014, Communications and Multimedia Security.

[15]  H. B. Cott,et al.  Adaptive Coloration in Animals , 1940 .

[16]  N.C. Rowe,et al.  Fake Honeypots: A Defensive Tactic for Cyberspace , 2006, 2006 IEEE Information Assurance Workshop.

[17]  Daniel Grosu,et al.  A Game Theoretic Investigation of Deception in Network Security , 2009, ICCCN.

[18]  Uri Gneezy,et al.  Deception: The Role of Consequences , 2005 .

[19]  Oguzhan Alagöz,et al.  Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  Sanford J. Grossman The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality , 1981, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[21]  Quanyan Zhu,et al.  Game-Theoretic Approach to Feedback-Driven Multi-stage Moving Target Defense , 2013, GameSec.

[22]  Lynn Langton,et al.  Victims of Identity Theft, 2012 , 2013 .

[23]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications , 1981 .

[24]  Lance Spitzner,et al.  The Honeynet Project: Trapping the Hackers , 2003, IEEE Secur. Priv..

[25]  Christine M. Mitchell,et al.  Human-computer cooperative problem solving: theory, design, and evaluation of an intelligent associate system , 1995, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[26]  Sajal K. Das,et al.  gPath: A Game-Theoretic Path Selection Algorithm to Protect Tor's Anonymity , 2010, GameSec.

[27]  Quanyan Zhu,et al.  A Stackelberg game perspective on the conflict between machine learning and data obfuscation , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS).

[28]  V. Crawford Lying for Strategic Advantage: Rational and Boundedly Rational Misrepresentation of Intentions , 2003 .

[29]  W. Youden,et al.  Index for rating diagnostic tests , 1950, Cancer.

[30]  T. Holz,et al.  Detecting honeypots and other suspicious environments , 2005, Proceedings from the Sixth Annual IEEE SMC Information Assurance Workshop.

[31]  Todd E. Humphreys,et al.  Attackers can spoof navigation signals without our knowledge. Here's how to fight back GPS lies , 2016, IEEE Spectrum.

[32]  Jie Zhang,et al.  A Multifaceted Approach to Modeling Agent Trust for Effective Communication in the Application of Mobile Ad Hoc Vehicular Networks , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[33]  Thorsten Holz,et al.  NoSEBrEaK - attacking honeynets , 2004, Proceedings from the Fifth Annual IEEE SMC Information Assurance Workshop, 2004..

[34]  Navin Kartik,et al.  Strategic Communication with Lying Costs , 2009 .

[35]  Quanyan Zhu,et al.  Flip the Cloud: Cyber-Physical Signaling Games in the Presence of Advanced Persistent Threats , 2015, GameSec.

[36]  J. Nash Equilibrium Points in N-Person Games. , 1950, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.