Abstract
The European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (hereinafter denominated as Europol) has constantly warned society about the unbowed growth of child sexual exploitation in its six issued IOCTAs (Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessments). If already all attempts succeed to thwart grooming as the initiation of contacts between pedophiles and adolescents, then CSEM (Child Sexual Exploitation Material) cannot accrue and SGEM (Self Generated Explicit Material) does not find its way to perpetrators. IM (Instant Messaging) spearheads the list of preferred communication tools that render grooming possible. The consensual editing of encrypted instant messages without decrypting nor understanding them based on black- or whitelisting commits itself to the thwarting of grooming. Existing literature attests whitelisting better functionality and worse performance than blacklisting. In contrast, recent related work objects to the inferior performance of whitelisting, since former experiments for both paradigms happened under incomparable conditions, and demands their remake under fair circumstances. This scholarly piece refutes the inferiority of whitelisting by exhibiting the results of a new test series in which blacklisting screens the complementary set of words that whitelisting does not incorporate. At the end, it corroborates that whitelisting outplays blacklisting and emerges victorious.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, R.J.: Security Engineering - A Guide to Building Dependable Distributed Systems, 2nd Edn. Wiley (2008). https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/book.html
Angerman, W.: Coming full circle with Boyd’s OODA loop ideas: an analysis of innovation diffusion and evolution. Master’s thesis, Defense Technical Information Center, March 2004. http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA425228
Chai, Q., Gong, G.: Verifiable symmetric searchable encryption for semi-honest-but-curious cloud servers. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 917–922, June 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICC.2012.6364125
Daemen, J., Rijmen, V.: The Design of Rijndael: AES - The Advanced Encryption Standard. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04722-4
Douceur, J.R.: The Sybil attack. In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, pp. 251–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45748-8_24. http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/101
Elgaby, M.: Computing on confidential character strings in an enhanced SIP-framework. Master’s thesis, University of Hagen, February 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2059.4241
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2014, January 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/16
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2015, June 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/03524
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2016, December 2016. https://doi.org/10.2813/275589
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2017, September 2017. https://doi.org/10.2813/55735
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2018, January 2019. https://doi.org/10.2813/858843
Europol: Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2019, October 2019. https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/iocta_2019.pdf
Fahrnberger, G.: Computing on encrypted character strings in clouds. In: Hota, C., Srimani, P.K. (eds.) ICDCIT 2013. LNCS, vol. 7753, pp. 244–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36071-8_19
Fahrnberger, G.: SecureString 2.0 - a cryptosystem for computing on encrypted character strings in clouds. In: Eichler, G., Gumzej, R. (eds.) Networked Information Systems, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 826, pp. 226–240. VDI, Düsseldorf, June 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4846.7521/5
Fahrnberger, G.: A second view on securestring 2.0. In: Natarajan, R. (ed.) ICDCIT 2014. LNCS, vol. 8337, pp. 239–250. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04483-5_25
Fahrnberger, G.: SIMS: a comprehensive approach for a secure instant messaging sifter. In: 2014 IEEE 13th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom), pp. 164–173, September 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/TrustCom.2014.25
Fahrnberger, G.: Repetition pattern attack on multi-word-containing SecureString 2.0 objects. In: Natarajan, R., Barua, G., Patra, M.R. (eds.) ICDCIT 2015. LNCS, vol. 8956, pp. 265–277. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14977-6_26
Fahrnberger, G.: A detailed view on securestring 3.0. In: Chakrabarti, A., Sharma, N., Balas, V.E. (eds.) Advances in Computing Applications, pp. 97–121. Springer, Singapore (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2630-0_7
Fahrnberger, G.: Secure whitelisting of instant messages. In: Fahrnberger, G., Eichler, G., Erfurth, C. (eds.) I4CS 2016. CCIS, vol. 648, pp. 90–111. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49466-1_7
Fahrnberger, G.: Secure filtering techniques for instant messaging. In: Unger, H., Halang, W.A. (eds.) Autonomous Systems 2017, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 857, pp. 226–240. VDI, Düsseldorf, October 2017. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29962.77761/1
Fahrnberger, G.: Blind censoring for instant messaging. In: Kubek, M.M., Li, Z. (eds.) Autonomous Systems 2018, Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 10, vol. 862, pp. 62–80. VDI, Düsseldorf, October 2018. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21331.63520/1
Fahrnberger, G.: Editing encrypted messages without decrypting nor understanding them. Ph.D. thesis, University of Hagen, June 2019. https://doi.org/10.18445/20190616-221209-3
Fahrnberger, G., Heneis, K.: SecureString 3.0. In: Natarajan, R., Barua, G., Patra, M.R. (eds.) ICDCIT 2015. LNCS, vol. 8956, pp. 331–334. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14977-6_33
Fahrnberger, G., Nayak, D., Martha, V.S., Ramaswamy, S.: SafeChat: a tool to shield children’s communication from explicit messages. In: 2014 14th International Conference on Innovations for Community Services (I4CS), pp. 80–86, June 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/I4CS.2014.6860557
Freitag, D.: Erweiterung eines SMPP-Frameworks zur sicheren Verarbeitung vertraulicher Zeichenketten. Master’s thesis, University of Hagen, September 2013. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4680.8641
Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S.: Design science research in information systems. In: Hevner, A., Chatterjee, S. (eds.) Design Research in Information Systems. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol. 22, pp. 9–22. Springer, Boston (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5653-8_2
Housley, R.: Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS). RFC 5652 (Proposed Standard), September 2009. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5652.txt
ISO/IEC 10116:2006: Information Technology - Security Techniques - Modes of Operation for an n-Bit Block Cipher. International Organization for Standardization, February 2006. https://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=38761
Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1145/219717.219748
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), February 2014. https://www.nist.gov/document-3766
Örencik, C., Savas, E.: An efficient privacy-preserving multi-keyword search over encrypted cloud data with ranking. Distrib. Parallel Databases 32(1), 119–160 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-013-7123-9
Rivest, R.L., Shamir, A., Adleman, L.: A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Commun. ACM 21(2), 120–126 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1145/359340.359342
Stebila, D., Green, J.: Elliptic Curve Algorithm Integration in the Secure Shell Transport Layer. RFC 5656 (Proposed Standard), December 2009. https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5656.txt
Waksman, A., Sethumadhavan, S.: Tamper evident microprocessors. In: 2010 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 173–188, May 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2010.19
van der Zwaan, J.M., Dignum, V., Jonker, C.M., van der Hof, S.: On technology against cyberbullying. In: van der Hof, S., van den Berg, B., Schermer, B. (eds.) Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety. ITLS, vol. 24, pp. 211–228. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-005-3_12
Acknowledgments
Many thanks to Bettina Baumgartner from the University of Vienna for proofreading this paper!
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fahrnberger, G. (2020). The Ultimate Victory of White- over Blacklisting for the Editing of Encrypted Instant Messages Without Decrypting Nor Understanding Them. In: Rautaray, S., Eichler, G., Erfurth, C., Fahrnberger, G. (eds) Innovations for Community Services. I4CS 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1139. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37484-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37484-6_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37483-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37484-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)