Dynamic Access Pricing for Internet Device Classification
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current systems fail to effectively classify devices as hostile or benign to mitigate denial of service (DoS) attacks, particularly in distributed web services, due to limitations in existing proof-of-work protocols and device fingerprinting methods that do not account for polymorphic devices and proxy servers.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of a proof-of-work protocol that uses dynamic access pricing and device fingerprinting to classify devices, involving a puzzle protocol with message authentication codes, device fingerprinting, and dynamic access pricing policies to differentiate between benign and hostile devices, and manage request rates, while maintaining unmodified content delivery to web browsers.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If device fingerprinting and proof-of-work protocols are implemented to classify devices as hostile or benign, then the ability to mitigate DoS attacks is improved, but the system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The classification system is divided into modular components: device fingerprinting module, proof-of-work puzzle generation module, request rate analysis module, and classification decision module. Each component handles a specific aspect of the classification process, making the overall system more manageable and maintainable despite its complexity
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs device fingerprinting and proof-of-work verification in advance before allowing full access to web services. By pre-classifying devices based on their response to puzzles and fingerprint analysis, the system prepares classification decisions beforehand, reducing the computational burden during actual service delivery
2Measurement precision
If dynamic access pricing with varying puzzle difficulty is used to differentiate benign and hostile devices, then the precision of device classification is improved, but the computational cost increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts puzzle difficulty levels based on device characteristics, request patterns, and classification confidence. Benign devices receive easier puzzles with lower computational requirements, while suspicious devices face progressively harder puzzles. This dynamic adaptation optimizes the balance between classification accuracy and energy consumption
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes key parameters including puzzle difficulty level, number of required proof-of-work solutions, and fingerprint verification strictness based on device behavior analysis. By adjusting these parameters dynamically, the system achieves high classification precision without uniformly high computational costs for all devices
3Reliability
If request rate limiting is applied to hostile devices to mitigate DoS attacks, then the protection of web services is improved, but the request processing speed decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The system introduces an intermediary classification layer between web service requests and the actual service processing. This intermediary quickly evaluates devices using lightweight fingerprinting and simple proof-of-work checks, allowing legitimate requests to pass through at high speed while blocking or rate-limiting malicious requests, thus protecting services without significantly impacting legitimate request processing speed
Data Source
AI summary
A dynamic access pricing and active countermeasure system and method for detecting and protecting against automated Internet attackers that incapacitates or disables the attackers. The dynamic access pricing and active countermeasure generally includes 1) the provision of a device fingerprint by a device at the start of an iteration of the client-puzzle challenge-response protocol; 2) a dynamic access pricing policy associated with a transaction identifier; 3) the determination of the puzzle difficulty level based on the interaction history of the device fingerprint solely with respect to the dynamic access pricing policy; 4) the binding of the device fingerprint to the client puzzle challenge; the generation of transaction authorization codes that the device presents to a protected application, system, interface or device.


