Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3304109.3306226acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Requet: real-time QoE detection for encrypted YouTube traffic

Published: 18 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

As video traffic dominates the Internet, it is important for operators to detect video Quality of Experience (QoE) in order to ensure adequate support for video traffic. With wide deployment of end-to-end encryption, traditional deep packet inspection based traffic monitoring approaches are becoming ineffective. This poses a challenge for network operators to monitor user QoE and improve upon their experience. To resolve this issue, we develop and present a system for REal-time QUality of experience metric detection for Encrypted Traffic, Requet. Requet uses a detection algorithm we develop to identify video and audio chunks from the IP headers of encrypted traffic. Features extracted from the chunk statistics are used as input to a Machine Learning (ML) algorithm to predict QoE metrics, specifically, buffer warning (low buffer, high buffer), video state (buffer increase, buffer decay, steady, stall), and video resolution. We collect a large YouTube dataset consisting of diverse video assets delivered over various WiFi network conditions to evaluate the performance. We compare Requet with a baseline system based on previous work and show that Requet outperforms the baseline system in accuracy of predicting buffer low warning, video state, and video resolution by 1.12X, 1.53X, and 3.14X, respectively.

References

[1]
About wireshark. https://www.wireshark.org/about.html.
[2]
Cisco visual networking index: Global mobile data traffic forecast update, 2016--2021. https://www.cisco.eom/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html.
[3]
Telerik fiddler, the free web debugging proxy. https://www.telerik.com/fiddler.
[4]
How Google is making YouTube safer for its users, Fortune. http://fortune.com/2016/08/02/google-youtube-encryption-https/, Aug. 2016.
[5]
Encrypted traffic analytics, Cisco white paper. https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/enterprise-networks/enterprise-network-security/nb-09-encrytd-traf-anlytcs-wp-cte-en.pdf, 2018.
[6]
3GPP. Transparent end-to-end Packet-switched Streaming Service (PSS). TS 26.234, 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 2010.
[7]
V. Aggarwal, E. Halepovic, J. Pang, S. Venkataraman, and H. Yan. Prometheus: toward quality-of-experience estimation for mobile apps from passive network measurements. In Proc. HotMobile, Feb. 2014.
[8]
A. Ahmed, Z. Shafiq, H. Bedi, and A. R. Khakpour. Suffering from buffering? detecting QoE impairments in live video streams. In Proc. IEEE ICNP, Oct. 2017.
[9]
J. Amann, O. Gasser, Q. Scheitle, L. Brent, G. Carle, and R. Holz. Mission accomplished?: HTTPS security after diginotar. In Proc. ACM IMC, Nov. 2017.
[10]
L. Armasu. Netflix adopts efficient HTTPS encryption for its video streams. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/netflix-efficient-https-video-streams, 32420.html, Aug. 2016.
[11]
P. Casas, M. Seufert, and R. Schatz. YOUQMON: a system for on-line monitoring of YouTube QoE in operational 3G networks. SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 41(2):44--46, 2013.
[12]
G. Cofano, L. De Cicco, T. Zinner, A. Nguyen-Ngoc, P. Tran-Gia, and S. Mascolo. Design and experimental evaluation of network-assisted strategies for http adaptive streaming. In Proc. of MMSys. ACM, 2016.
[13]
C. Cortes and V. Vapnik. Support-vector networks. Machine learning, 20(3):273--297, 1995.
[14]
Y. Cui, T. Li, C. Liu, X. Wang, and M. Kühlewind. Innovating transport with QUIC: design approaches and research challenges. IEEE Internet Computing, 21(2):72--76, 2017.
[15]
G. Dimopoulos, I. Leontiadis, P. Barlet-Ros, and K. Papagiannaki. Measuring video QoE from encrypted traffic. In Proc. ACM IMC, Nov. 2016.
[16]
F. Dobrian, V. Sekar, A. Awan, I. Stoica, D. Joseph, A. Ganjam, J. Zhan, and H. Zhang. Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2011.
[17]
Z. Durumeric, Z. Ma, D. Springall, R. Barnes, N. Sullivan, E. Bursztein, M. Bailey, J. A. Halderman, and V. Paxson. The security impact of HTTPS interception. In Proc. NDSS, Feb. 2017.
[18]
R. T. Fielding and J. F. Reschke. Hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP/1.1): message syntax and routing. RFC, 7230:1--89, 2014.
[19]
S. Galetto, P. Bottaro, C. Carrara, F. Secco, A. Guidolin, E. Targa, C. Narduzzi, and G. Giorgi. Detection of video/audio streaming packet flows for non-intrusive QoS/QoE monitoring. In IEEE Int. Workshop on Measurement and Networking, Sept. 2017.
[20]
T. A. Guarnieri, I. Drago, A. B. Vieira, Í. Cunha, and J. M. Almeida. Characterizing QoE in large-scale live streaming. In Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM, Dec. 2017.
[21]
T. K. Ho. Random decision forests. In Proc. IEEE Conf. Document analysis and recognition, 1995.
[22]
T. Huang, R. Johari, N. McKeown, M. Trunnell, and M. Watson. A buffer-based approach to rate adaptation: evidence from a large video streaming service. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2014.
[23]
A. M. Kakhki, S. Jero, D. R. Choffnes, C. Nita-Rotaru, and A. Mislove. Taking a long look at QUIC: an approach for rigorous evaluation of rapidly evolving transport protocols. In Proc. ACM IMC, Nov. 2017.
[24]
V. Krishnamoorthi, N. Carlsson, E. Halepovic, and E. Petajan. BUFFEST: predicting buffer conditions and real-time requirements of HTTP(S) adaptive streaming clients. In Proc. ACM MMSys, June 2017.
[25]
W. Law. Ultra-Low-Latency STreaming Using Chunked-Encoded and Chunked-Transferred CMAF. Technical report, Akamai, 2018.
[26]
F. Li, J. W. Chung, and M. Claypool. Silhouette: Identifying youtube video flows from encrypted traffic. In Proc. NOSSDAV, June 2018.
[27]
Y. Lin, E. M. R. Oliveira, S. B. Jemaa, and S. Elayoubi. Machine learning for predicting QoE of video streaming in mobile networks. In IEEE ICC, May 2017.
[28]
T. Mangla, E. Halepovic, M. Ammar, and E. Zegura. eMIMIC: estimating http-based video QoE metrics from encrypted network traffic. In Proc. IEEE TMA, 2018.
[29]
T. Mangla, E. Halepovic, M. H. Ammar, and E. W. Zegura. MIMIC: using passive network measurements to estimate http-based adaptive video QoE metrics. In Proc. IEEE TMA, 2017.
[30]
A. Mansy, M. H. Ammar, J. Chandrashekar, and A. Sheth. Characterizing client behavior of commercial mobile video streaming services. In Proc. ACM MoVid, Mar. 2014.
[31]
H. Mao, R. Netravali, and M. Alizadeh. Neural adaptive video streaming with pensieve. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2017.
[32]
M. H. Mazhar and Z. Shafiq. Real-time video quality of experience monitoring for HTTPS and QUIC. In Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2018.
[33]
A. Mondal, S. Sengupta, B. R. Reddy, M. J. V. Koundinya, C. Govindarajan, P. De, N. Ganguly, and S. Chakraborty. Candid with YouTube: adaptive streaming behavior and implications on data consumption. In Proc. NOSSDAV, June 2017.
[34]
I. Orsolic, D. Pevec, M. Suznjevic, and L. Skorin-Kapov. YouTube QoE estimation based on the analysis of encrypted network traffic using machine learning. In Proc. IEEE Globecom Workshops, Dec. 2016.
[35]
S. Petrangeli, T. Wu, T. Wauters, R. Huysegems, T. Bostoen, and F. De Turck. A machine learning-based framework for preventing video freezes in http adaptive streaming. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2017.
[36]
A. Razaghpanah, A. A. Niaki, N. Vallina-Rodriguez, S. Sundaresan, J. Amann, and P. Gill. Studying TLS usage in android apps. In Proc. ACM CoNEXT, Dec. 2017.
[37]
A. Reed and M. Kranch. Identifying HTTPS-protected netflix videos in real-time. In Proc. CODASPY, Mar. 2017.
[38]
P. Schmitt, F. Bronzino, R. Teixeira, T. Chattopadhyay, and N. Feamster. Enhancing transparency: Internet video quality inference from network traffic. In Proc. TPRC46, 2018.
[39]
T. Stockhammer. Dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP -: standards and design principles. In Proc. ACM MMSys, Feb. 2011.
[40]
D. Tsilimantos, T. Karagkioules, and S. Valentin. Classifying flows and buffer state for YouTube's HTTP adaptive streaming service in mobile networks. CoRR, abs/1803.00303, June 2018.
[41]
D. Tsilimantos, T. Karagkioules, and S. Valentin. Classifying flows and buffer state for youtube's HTTP adaptive streaming service in mobile networks. In Proc. ACM MMSys, June 2018.
[42]
V. Vasilev, J. Leguay, S. Paris, L. Maggi, and M. Debbah. Predicting QoE factors with machine learning. In Proc. IEEE ICC, May 2018.
[43]
N. Vogt. Youtube audio quality bitrate used for 360p, 480p, 720p, 1080p, 1440p, 2160p. https://www.h3xed.com/web-and-internet/youtube-audio-quality-bitrate-240p-360p-480p-720p-1080p, 2015.
[44]
F. Wamser, M. Seufert, P. Casas, R. Irmer, P. Tran-Gia, and R. Schatz. YoMoApp: A tool for analyzing QoE of YouTube HTTP adaptive streaming in mobile networks. In Proc. European Conf. on Networks and Communications (EuCNC), June 2015.
[45]
N. Weil. The state of MPEG-DASH 2016. http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Articles/The-State-of-MPEG-DASH-2016-110099.aspx.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Inference Analysis of Video Quality of Experience in Relation with Face Emotion, Video Advertisement, and ITU-T P.1203Technologies10.3390/technologies1205006212:5(62)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
  • (2024)Planter: Rapid Prototyping of In-Network Machine Learning InferenceACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review10.1145/3687230.368723254:1(2-21)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Standardizing Multimedia QoE Telemetry from Telecommunications Networks for Open AnalyticsProceedings of the 2024 SIGCOMM Workshop on Emerging Multimedia Systems10.1145/3672196.3673400(14-20)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
MMSys '19: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference
June 2019
374 pages
ISBN:9781450362979
DOI:10.1145/3304109
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 18 June 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Badges

Author Tags

  1. HTTP adaptive streaming
  2. machine learning

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

MMSys '19
Sponsor:
MMSys '19: 10th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference
June 18 - 21, 2019
Massachusetts, Amherst

Acceptance Rates

MMSys '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 40 of 82 submissions, 49%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 176 of 530 submissions, 33%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)72
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)19
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Inference Analysis of Video Quality of Experience in Relation with Face Emotion, Video Advertisement, and ITU-T P.1203Technologies10.3390/technologies1205006212:5(62)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
  • (2024)Planter: Rapid Prototyping of In-Network Machine Learning InferenceACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review10.1145/3687230.368723254:1(2-21)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Standardizing Multimedia QoE Telemetry from Telecommunications Networks for Open AnalyticsProceedings of the 2024 SIGCOMM Workshop on Emerging Multimedia Systems10.1145/3672196.3673400(14-20)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Poster:Inferring Video Resolution with Coarse QoS in GEO Satellite NetworksProceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications10.1145/3638550.3643623(143-143)Online publication date: 28-Feb-2024
  • (2024) Marina : Realizing ML-Driven Real-Time Network Traffic Monitoring at Terabit Scale IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2024.338239321:3(2773-2790)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)Improving the Transfer of Machine Learning-Based Video QoE Estimation Across Diverse NetworksIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.332666421:3(2824-2836)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)Inferring Video Streaming Quality of Real-Time Communication Inside NetworkIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology10.1109/TCSVT.2024.337560434:8(7756-7770)Online publication date: Aug-2024
  • (2024)ML-Powered KQI Estimation for XR Services: A Case Study on 360-VideoIEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society10.1109/OJCOMS.2024.34228725(4075-4097)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Doubling Down on Wireless Capacity: A Review of Integrated Circuits, Systems, and Networks for Full DuplexProceedings of the IEEE10.1109/JPROC.2024.3438755112:5(405-432)Online publication date: May-2024
  • (2024)Machine Learning With Computer Networks: Techniques, Datasets, and ModelsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.338446012(54673-54720)Online publication date: 2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media