4.6 Article

Port-Based Anonymous Communication Network: An Efficient and Secure Anonymous Communication Network

期刊

SENSORS
卷 23, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s23218810

关键词

anonymous communication networks; anonymity; routing; Tor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a port-based anonymous communication network (PBACN) that reduces latency and improves anonymity compared to Tor. By using a path construction algorithm and a port-based source routing addressing method, the proposed PBACN achieves a higher level of anonymity while simplifying routing complexity.
With the rise of the internet, there has been an increasing focus on user anonymity. Anonymous communication networks (ACNs) aim to protect the identity privacy of users in the network. As a typical ACN, Tor achieves user anonymity by relaying user data through a series of relay nodes. However, this results in higher latency due to the transmission of network traffic between multiple nodes. This paper proposes a port-based anonymous communication network (PBACN) to address this issue. First, we propose a path construction algorithm. This algorithm describes constructing paths by partitioning the communication path information, which can reduce the probability of being discovered by adversaries. Secondly, we design a port-based source routing addressing method. During data transmission from the source to the destination, each node can directly forward the data by resolving the address into the port of each node. This method eliminates the need for table lookups, reducing the complexity of routing. Lastly, we propose an entropy-based metric to measure the anonymity of different ACNs. In terms of experimental evaluation, we quantitatively analyze the anonymity and end-to-end delay of various ACNs. The experimental results show that our proposed method reduces end-to-end delay by approximately 25% compared to Tor. When the adversary fraction is 20%, PBACN can improve the anonymity degree by approximately 4%.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据