Comparative Privacy Analysis of Mobile Browsers

Ahsan Zafar, Anupam Das
{"title":"Comparative Privacy Analysis of Mobile Browsers","authors":"Ahsan Zafar, Anupam Das","doi":"10.1145/3577923.3583638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Online trackers are invasive as they track our digital footprints, many of which are sensitive in nature, and when aggregated over time, they can help infer intricate details about our lifestyles and habits. Although much research has been conducted to understand the effectiveness of existing countermeasures for the desktop platform, little is known about how mobile browsers have evolved to handle online trackers. With mobile devices now generating more web traffic than their desktop counterparts, we fill this research gap through a large-scale comparative analysis of mobile web browsers. We crawl 10K valid websites from the Tranco list on real mobile devices. Our data collection process covers both popular generic browsers (e.g., Chrome, Firefox, and Safari) as well as privacy-focused browsers (e.g., Brave, Duck Duck Go, and Firefox-Focus). We use dynamic analysis of runtime execution traces and static analysis of source codes to highlight the tracking behavior of invasive fingerprinters. We also find evidence of tailored content being served to different browsers. In particular, we note that Firefox Focus sees altered script code, whereas Brave and Duck Duck Go have highly similar content. To test the privacy protection of browsers, we measure the responses of each browser in blocking trackers and advertisers and note the strengths and weaknesses of privacy browsers. To establish ground truth, we use well-known block lists, including EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Disconnect and WhoTracksMe and find that Brave generally blocks the highest number of content that should be blocked as per these lists. Focus performs better against social trackers, and Duck Duck Go restricts third-party trackers that perform email-based tracking.","PeriodicalId":387479,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Thirteenth ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Thirteenth ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3577923.3583638","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Online trackers are invasive as they track our digital footprints, many of which are sensitive in nature, and when aggregated over time, they can help infer intricate details about our lifestyles and habits. Although much research has been conducted to understand the effectiveness of existing countermeasures for the desktop platform, little is known about how mobile browsers have evolved to handle online trackers. With mobile devices now generating more web traffic than their desktop counterparts, we fill this research gap through a large-scale comparative analysis of mobile web browsers. We crawl 10K valid websites from the Tranco list on real mobile devices. Our data collection process covers both popular generic browsers (e.g., Chrome, Firefox, and Safari) as well as privacy-focused browsers (e.g., Brave, Duck Duck Go, and Firefox-Focus). We use dynamic analysis of runtime execution traces and static analysis of source codes to highlight the tracking behavior of invasive fingerprinters. We also find evidence of tailored content being served to different browsers. In particular, we note that Firefox Focus sees altered script code, whereas Brave and Duck Duck Go have highly similar content. To test the privacy protection of browsers, we measure the responses of each browser in blocking trackers and advertisers and note the strengths and weaknesses of privacy browsers. To establish ground truth, we use well-known block lists, including EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Disconnect and WhoTracksMe and find that Brave generally blocks the highest number of content that should be blocked as per these lists. Focus performs better against social trackers, and Duck Duck Go restricts third-party trackers that perform email-based tracking.
手机浏览器的隐私比较分析
在线追踪器是侵入性的,因为它们追踪我们的数字足迹,其中许多本质上是敏感的,随着时间的推移,它们可以帮助推断出我们生活方式和习惯的复杂细节。尽管已经进行了大量的研究来了解桌面平台现有对策的有效性,但对于移动浏览器如何进化以处理在线跟踪器知之甚少。随着移动设备比桌面设备产生更多的网络流量,我们通过对移动网络浏览器的大规模对比分析来填补这一研究空白。我们在真正的移动设备上从Tranco列表中抓取了10K个有效网站。我们的数据收集过程涵盖了流行的通用浏览器(例如Chrome, Firefox和Safari)以及以隐私为重点的浏览器(例如Brave, Duck Duck Go和Firefox- focus)。我们使用运行时执行轨迹的动态分析和源代码的静态分析来突出入侵指纹的跟踪行为。我们还发现了针对不同浏览器提供定制内容的证据。我们特别注意到,Firefox Focus看到的是修改过的脚本代码,而Brave和Duck Duck Go的内容非常相似。为了测试浏览器的隐私保护,我们测量了每个浏览器在阻止跟踪器和广告商方面的反应,并指出了隐私浏览器的优缺点。为了确定事实,我们使用了众所周知的阻止列表,包括EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Disconnect和WhoTracksMe,并发现Brave通常会阻止根据这些列表应该阻止的最多内容。Focus在对抗社交追踪器时表现更好,而Duck Duck Go则限制了执行基于电子邮件的追踪的第三方追踪器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信