3.8 Proceedings Paper

mmEve: Eavesdropping on Smartphone's Earpiece via COTS mmWave Device

出版社

ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/3495243.3560543

关键词

Eavesdropping; smartphone; earpiece; mmWave sensing

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2020AAA0107700]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [62032021, 61972348, 61772236, 62122066]
  3. Leading Innovative and Entrepreneur Team Introduction Program of Zhejiang [2018R01005]
  4. Research Institute of Cyberspace Governance in Zhejiang University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a remote attack on smartphone earpieces using mmWave sensors to eavesdrop on emitted speech. Through optimizing the fitting function and denoising scheme, the attack range can be extended to 6-8m, posing a threat to 23 different models of smartphones.
Earpiece mode of smartphones is often used for confidential communication. In this paper, we proposed a remote(>2m) and motion-resilient attack on smartphone earpiece. We developed an end-to-end eavesdropping system mmEve based on a commercial mmWave sensor to recover speech emitted from smartphone earpiece. The rationale of the attack is based on our observation that, soundwaves emitted from the smartphone's earpiece have a strong correlation with reflected mmWaves from the smartphone's rear. However, we find the recovered speech suffers from the sensor's self-noise and smartphone user's motion which limit attack distance to less than 2m, causing limited threats in real world. We modeled the motion interference under mmWave sensing and proposed a motion-resilient solution by optimizing the fitting function on I/Q plane. To achieve a practical attack with reasonable attack distance, we developed a GAN-based denoising scheme to eliminate the noise pattern of the sensor, which boosted the attack range to 6-8m. We evaluated mmEve with extensive experiments and find 23 different models of smartphones manufactured by Samsung, Huawei, etc. can be compromised by the proposed attack.

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

3.8
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