Categories
Uncategorized

Six Degrees of Separation and Cybersecurity

In class, we learned about the Six Degrees of Separation. I find it interesting how I can be linked to another person on the planet with about six steps. As I begin to take in the information, I began to wonder if this concept is applicable to other things beside social connections, and this is where I got the idea of cybersecurity.

As a result, I have come across some interesting articles that talk about the connectivity and the issues that this might bring (links below). If we as people are that connected together, what does that tell us about our security online? Does this pose any problems? Through the integration of technology in our lives, a lot of our tasks are increasingly being done online. This connectivity can be convenient, but it can also be a risk.

In one of the articles, one thing I found interesting was where they describe a scenario. The scenario is, if someone connects to a network (for example at a coffee shop), then this individual’s device is one degree separated from all the other users on the same network. Since many people use their devices (smartphones) for work, that means that this individual is two degrees away from the connected devices of other people, in their work, homes and more. If someone were to plant malware on the devices in the network, it can spread really easily. Relating to the six degrees of separation and how one person can be connected to anyone in the world in about 6 steps, this means that it can spread globally very quickly, if the connected devices are unprotected. Reaching a specific device in the world may not be the same as six steps for people, but it may not require a large number of steps either, depending on how the malware is designed.

Another interesting point involves the risks that impact supply chains. In the supply chain, each part is connected and so if one part of the supply chain were to be attacked, the entire chain is affected. They have included some example risk scenarios to illustrate what could happen, and one of them is a data breach.

Through the links, having one of the enterprise’s suppliers attacked can allow the attackers to access credentials on the enterprise’s system.

The above diagram illustrates a data breach that has happened to Target back in 2013. One of their suppliers was compromised and from that point, the attackers were able to target Target’s internal network.

After reading through this case, and seeing how connected systems can be vulnerable, this also makes me wonder how vulnerable we are. We are connected to many people around the world through our social medias and connections online. Like the example above, if someone wanted to infiltrate Person A’s system, they don’t have to target them directly, but they can target someone else connected to Person A and then use that connection to get to Person A. From the Six Degrees of Separation, that could mean that the attackers could find a lot of entry points (anyone in the world is separated by around 6 steps) and eventually, they will reach Person A. It is important to secure our devices, so malware does not spread that easily, and allow less entry points from other people.

Links:

https://www.securityroundtable.org/6-degrees-of-iot-the-kevin-bacon-theory-of-networking/

https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en-us/knowledge/publications/dfa3603c/six-degrees-of-separation-cyber-risk-across-global-supply-chains

https://www.zdnet.com/article/anatomy-of-the-target-data-breach-missed-opportunities-and-lessons-learned/

Categories
Uncategorized

Is the Dark Web A Bow-Tie Structure?

In lecture, I found the bow tie structure of the web very interesting to visualize. While thinking about how the structure works, a thought popped up to my head about the dark web. From my understanding, the dark web is the part of the web that is not indexed by search engines and can only be accessed through special software. The random thought and curiosity of the web’s structure, led me to question what the structure of the dark web is like.

I wondered if the same bowtie structure holds for the dark web as well, so I did a little bit of digging and came across an paper where they try to answer that question. They first did some crawling through the dark web pages, which they defined as the websites in the onionweb, domains in the “.onion” pseudo-top-level-domain. Through this process, they have made many interesting observations. One observation in particular, is that the structure of the dark web is very different from that of the World Wide Web. In the chart below, it shows the distribution of the websites in their respective groups of the bow-tie structure.

This is the bow-tie decomposition from the article comparing the structure of the World Wide Web and the dark web.

It is very interesting to see that most of the websites fall under the OUT group, a very small percentage in the CORE group (the group also called the Giant SCC). None of the websites are in the IN, Tube, tendrils, or disconnected groups. One interesting fact they have observed, is that 87% of the websites do not link to another website.

Based on this information, the dark web does not seem to take on the bow-tie structure. The article did offer some suggestions to why this may be the case, but I have a few ideas as well. Based on my understanding, access to the onionweb is designed with anonymity in mind. To access the network requires the Tor browser which takes extra steps to anonymize the users compared to other browsers we may be familiar with. Also, since the dark web requires more steps in order to access, compared to the World Wide Web, I would make the assumption that the content may be more secretive. So the content may not be designed for anyone to access but only for a select few. Having many links from other web pages may make them easier to access. No entry points would imply that there would be no websites in the IN group. However, the urls in the onionweb do not have a readable address but is a randomly generated 16 character. It would be very difficult to remember them and maybe there is a list where they can be accessed from. This might explain the presence of the Giant SCC group (CORE in the chart) and why the websites are not all disconnected from each other.

The paper goes into more detail of how they crawled through the websites and other interesting observations, which I have not gone into detail in this post, but it can be accessed through the link below:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.07525