|
|
|
|
|
by yunohn
1466 days ago
|
|
I’m a little confused about your attack vector - how feasible would you reckon it is to place such a malicious script on the largest public websites in existence, versus just getting the victim to install a Trojan? The latter could just literally monitor the user. I’m not saying your paper is technically wrong, just practically infeasible. Right now, you’ve chosen very specific websites. Have you explored if there is a correlation between specific scripts (react, jquery, etc) and whether websites with similar setups cannot be differentiated? I was also curious about content/non-homepage paths. Your conclusion seems to be that interrupts/etc are the primary indicators, so I suspect there’s a connection. Edit: In my experience, large websites and most web apps don’t use CDNJS/etc, but bundle their code - this would make injecting your script much harder without a supply chain attack. On second thought, given CORS I think this attack is actually impossible. How would your embedded script communicate your findings with your server? You would need to control the originating domain itself… |
|
We did get a comment about this in our rebuttal but didn't end up including it in our final paper -- we found that we distinguished sites with the same frameworks (such as react, angular, and jquery) at the same accuracy at sites that used different frameworks.
We didn't do much research into content/non-homepage paths but it's a good area for future research. I would suspect it'll still do pretty well.
And yes, we concluded that the source came from interrupts (in Table 3 of our paper you can see we ran an experiment with frequency scaling turned off), which does make me question the practicality of hertzbleed. I wouldn't doubt it can be exploited somehow though.