Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3548606.3560644acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Discovering IoT Physical Channel Vulnerabilities

Published: 07 November 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Smart homes contain diverse sensors and actuators controlled by IoT apps that provide custom automation. Prior works showed that an adversary could exploit physical interaction vulnerabilities among apps and put the users and environment at risk, e.g., to break into a house, an adversary turns on the heater to trigger an app that opens windows when the temperature exceeds a threshold. Currently, the safe behavior of physical interactions relies on either app code analysis or dynamic analysis of device states with manually derived policies by developers. However, existing works fail to achieve sufficient breadth and fidelity to translate the app code into their physical behavior or provide incomplete security policies, causing poor accuracy and false alarms.
In this paper, we introduce a new approach, IoTSeer, which efficiently combines app code analysis and dynamic analysis with new security policies to discover physical interaction vulnerabilities. IoTSeer works by first translating sensor events and actuator commands of each app into a physical execution model (PeM) and unifying PeMs to express composite physical execution of apps (CPeM). CPeM allows us to deploy IoTSeer in different smart homes by defining its execution parameters with minimal data collection. IoTSeer supports new security policies with intended/unintended physical channel labels. It then efficiently checks them on the CPeM via falsification, which addresses the undecidability of verification due to the continuous and discrete behavior of IoT devices.
We evaluate IoTSeer in an actual house with 14 actuators, six sensors, and 39 apps. IoTSeer discovers 16 unique policy violations, whereas prior works identify only 2 out of 16 with 18 falsely flagged violations. IoTSeer only requires 30 mins of data collection for each actuator to set the CPeM parameters and is adaptive to newly added, removed, and relocated devices.

References

[1]
Houssam Abbas, Georgios Fainekos, Sriram Sankaranarayanan, and Aarti Gupta. 2013. Probabilistic temporal logic falsification of cyber-physical systems. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems (TECS).
[2]
Houssam Abbas, Hans Mittelmann, and Georgios Fainekos. 2014. Formal property verification in a conformance testing framework. In ACM/IEEE Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign (MEMOCODE).
[3]
Abbas Acar, Hossein Fereidooni, Tigist Abera, Amit Kumar Sikder, Markus Miettinen, Hidayet Aksu, Mauro Conti, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi, and A Selcuk Uluagac. 2018. Peek-a-Boo: I see your smart home activities, even encrypted! arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.02741.
[4]
Omotayo G Adewumi, Karim Djouani, and Anish M Kurien. 2013. RSSI based indoor and outdoor distance estimation for localization in WSN. In IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT).
[5]
Mohannad Alhanahnah, Clay Stevens, and Hamid Bagheri. 2020. Scalable analysis of interaction threats in IoT systems. In ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis.
[6]
Rajeev Alur, Costas Courcoubetis, Nicolas Halbwachs, Thomas A Henzinger, Pei-Hsin Ho, Xavier Nicollin, Alfredo Olivero, Joseph Sifakis, and Sergio Yovine. 1995. The algorithmic analysis of hybrid systems. Theoretical Computer Science.
[7]
Yashwanth Singh Rahul Annapureddy and Georgios E Fainekos. 2010. Ant colonies for temporal logic falsification of hybrid systems. In Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society.
[8]
Yashwanth Annpureddy, Che Liu, Georgios Fainekos, and Sriram Sankaranarayanan. 2011. S-taliro: A tool for temporal logic falsification for hybrid systems. In International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Springer.
[9]
Ardupilot SITL 2022. Ardupilot Simulation. https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/ simulation-2.html. [Online; accessed 18-April-2022].
[10]
Musard Balliu, Massimo Merro, and Michele Pasqua. 2019. Securing cross-app interactions in IoT platforms. In IEEE Computer Security Foundations Symposium.
[11]
Musard Balliu, Massimo Merro, Michele Pasqua, and Mikhail Shcherbakov. 2020. Friendly Fire: Cross-App Interactions in IoT Platforms. ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security (TOPS).
[12]
Lei Bu, Wen Xiong, Chieh-Jan Mike Liang, Shi Han, Dongmei Zhang, Shan Lin, and Xuandong Li. 2018. Systematically ensuring the confidence of real-time home automation IoT systems. ACM Transactions on Cyber-Physical Systems.
[13]
Carla Physics 2022. Carla - Control and Monitor Vehicle Physics. https://carla. readthedocs.io/en/latest/tuto_G_control_vehicle_physics/. [Online; accessed 18-April-2022].
[14]
Z Berkay Celik, Earlence Fernandes, Eric Pauley, Gang Tan, and Patrick McDaniel. 2019. Program analysis of commodity IoT applications for security and privacy: Challenges and opportunities. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR).
[15]
Z Berkay Celik, Patrick McDaniel, and Gang Tan. 2018. Soteria: Automated IoT safety and security analysis. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC).
[16]
Z Berkay Celik, Patrick McDaniel, Gang Tan, Leonardo Babun, and A Selcuk Uluagac. 2019. Verifying internet of things safety and security in physical spaces. IEEE Security & Privacy.
[17]
Z Berkay Celik, Gang Tan, and Patrick D McDaniel. 2019. IoTGuard: Dynamic Enforcement of Security and Safety Policy in Commodity IoT. In NDSS.
[18]
Haotian Chi, Qiang Zeng, Xiaojiang Du, and Jiaping Yu. 2020. Cross-app interference threats in smart homes: Categorization, detection and handling. In IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN).
[19]
Anthony Corso, Robert J Moss, Mark Koren, Ritchie Lee, and Mykel J Kochenderfer. 2020. A survey of algorithms for black-box safety validation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.02979.
[20]
Wenbo Ding and Hongxin Hu. 2018. On the safety of IoT device physical interaction control. In ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).
[21]
Wenbo Ding, Hongxin Hu, and Long Cheng. 2021. IoTSafe: Enforcing Safety and Security Policy with Real IoT Physical Interaction Discovery. In NDSS.
[22]
Georgios Fainekos, Bardh Hoxha, and Sriram Sankaranarayanan. 2019. Robustness of Specifications and Its Applications to Falsification, Parameter Mining, and Runtime Monitoring with S-TaLiRo. In International Conference on Runtime Verification. Springer.
[23]
Chenglong Fu, Qiang Zeng, and Xiaojiang Du. 2021. HAWatcher: SemanticsAware Anomaly Detection for Appified Smart Homes. In USENIX Security.
[24]
Patrice Godefroid, Michael Y Levin, and David A Molnar. 2008. Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing. In NDSS.
[25]
Furkan Goksel, Muslum Ozgur Ozmen, Michael Reeves, Basavesh Shivakumar, and Z Berkay Celik. 2021. On the safety implications of misordered events and commands in IoT systems. In IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW).
[26]
Matthew J Hancock. 2006. The 1-D heat equation. MIT OpenCourseWare.
[27]
Thomas A Henzinger, Peter W Kopke, Anuj Puri, and Pravin Varaiya. 1998. What's decidable about hybrid automata? J. Comput. System Sci.
[28]
HomeKit 2022. Apple's HomeKit. https://www.apple.com/ios/home/. [Online; accessed 30-April-2022].
[29]
Bardh Hoxha, Adel Dokhanchi, and Georgios Fainekos. 2018. Mining parametric temporal logic properties in model-based design for cyber-physical systems. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer.
[30]
IFTTT 2022. IFTTT (If This Then That). https://ifttt.com/. [Online; accessed 18-April-2022].
[31]
AG Jackson, SJP Laube, and J Busbee. 1996. Sensor principles and methods for measuring physical properties. JOM.
[32]
Karel J Keesman. 2011. System identification: an introduction. Springer Science & Business Media.
[33]
Mark G Lawrence. 2005. The relationship between relative humidity and the dewpoint temperature in moist air: A simple conversion and applications. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
[34]
Nancy Lynch, Roberto Segala, and Frits Vaandrager. 2003. Hybrid I/O automata. Information and Computation.
[35]
Sunil Manandhar, Kevin Moran, Kaushal Kafle, Ruhao Tang, Denys Poshyvanyk, and Adwait Nadkarni. 2020. Towards a Natural Perspective of Smart Homes for Practical Security and Safety Analyses. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P).
[36]
Fedor Mitschke. 2009. Decibel units. In Fiber Optics. Springer.
[37]
Dang Tu Nguyen, Chengyu Song, Zhiyun Qian, Srikanth V Krishnamurthy, Edward JM Colbert, and Patrick McDaniel. 2018. IoTSan: Fortifying the safety of IoT systems. In International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies.
[38]
Justin Norden, Matthew O'Kelly, and Aman Sinha. 2019. Efficient black-box assessment of autonomous vehicle safety. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.03618.
[39]
OpenHab 2022. OpenHAB: Open Source Automation Software for Home. https: //www.openhab.org/. [Online; accessed 30-April-2022].
[40]
Muslum Ozgur Ozmen, Xuansong Li, Andrew Chu, Z. Berkay Celik, Bardh Hoxha, and Xiangyu Zhang. 2022. Discovering IoT Physical Channel Vulnerabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.01812.
[41]
Erion Plaku, Lydia E Kavraki, and Moshe Y Vardi. 2009. Falsification of LTL safety properties in hybrid systems. In International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Springer.
[42]
Claudius Ptolemaeus (Ed.). 2014. System Design, Modeling, and Simulation using Ptolemy II. Ptolemy.org. http://ptolemy.org/books/Systems
[43]
PX4 SITL 2022. PX4 Simulation. https://docs.px4.io/master/en/simulation/. [Online; accessed 18-April-2022].
[44]
Philippe Réfrégier. 2004. Noise theory and application to physics: from fluctuations to information. Springer Science & Business Media.
[45]
Rahul Anand Sharma, Elahe Soltanaghaei, Anthony Rowe, and Vyas Sekar. 2022. Lumos: Identifying and Localizing Diverse Hidden IoT Devices in an Unfamiliar Environment. In USENIX Security.
[46]
Milijana Surbatovich, Jassim Aljuraidan, Lujo Bauer, Anupam Das, and Limin Jia. 2017. Some recipes can do more than spoil your appetite: Analyzing the security and privacy risks of IFTTT recipes. In International Conference on World Wide Web.
[47]
Yuan Tian, Nan Zhang, Yueh-Hsun Lin, XiaoFeng Wang, Blase Ur, Xianzheng Guo, and Patrick Tague. 2017. Smartauth: User-centered authorization for the internet of things. In USENIX Security.
[48]
Blase Ur, Melwyn Pak Yong Ho, Stephen Brawner, Jiyun Lee, Sarah Mennicken, Noah Picard, Diane Schulze, and Michael L Littman. 2016. Trigger-action programming in the wild: An analysis of 200,000 IFTTT recipes. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
[49]
Nikolaos Voudoukis and Sarantos Oikonomidis. 2017. Inverse square law for light and radiation: A unifying educational approach. European Journal of Engineering Research and Science.
[50]
Qi Wang, Pubali Datta, Wei Yang, Si Liu, Adam Bates, and Carl A Gunter. 2019. Charting the Attack Surface of Trigger-Action IoT Platforms. In ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS).
[51]
Giovanni Zanca, Francesco Zorzi, Andrea Zanella, and Michele Zorzi. 2008. Experimental comparison of RSSI-based localization algorithms for indoor wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Real-World Wireless Sensor Networks.
[52]
Zapier 2022. Zapier: Connect your apps and automate workflows. https://zapier. com/. [Online; accessed 30-April-2022].
[53]
Lefan Zhang, Weijia He, Jesse Martinez, Noah Brackenbury, Shan Lu, and Blase Ur. 2019. AutoTap: synthesizing and repairing trigger-action programs using LTL properties. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).
[54]
Valerie Zhao, Lefan Zhang, Bo Wang, Shan Lu, and Blase Ur. 2020. Visualizing Differences to Improve End-User Understanding of Trigger-Action Programs. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
[55]
Alexander Zhivov, Hakon Skistad, Elisabeth Mundt, Vladimir Posokhin, Mike Ratcliff, Eugene Shilkrot, and Andrey Strongin. 2001. Principles of air and contaminant movement inside and around buildings. In Industrial Ventilation Design Guidebook. Elsevier.
[56]
Aditya Zutshi, Jyotirmoy V Deshmukh, Sriram Sankaranarayanan, and James Kapinski. 2014. Multiple shooting, cegar-based falsification for hybrid systems. In International Conference on Embedded Software.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Traditional IOCs Meet Dynamic App–Device Interactions for IoT-Specific Threat IntelligenceIEEE Internet of Things Journal10.1109/JIOT.2024.341335111:19(30571-30593)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2024
  • (2024)SmartTracer: Anomaly-Driven Provenance Analysis Based on Device Correlation in Smart Home SystemsIEEE Internet of Things Journal10.1109/JIOT.2023.330808911:4(5731-5744)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Root Cause Analysis of Anomaly in Smart Homes Through Device Interaction GraphAdvanced Intelligent Computing Technology and Applications10.1007/978-981-97-5606-3_31(363-374)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CCS '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
November 2022
3598 pages
ISBN:9781450394505
DOI:10.1145/3548606
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 November 2022

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. physical channel vulnerabilities
  2. security analysis
  3. smart homes

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

CCS '22
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,261 of 6,999 submissions, 18%

Upcoming Conference

CCS '24
ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
October 14 - 18, 2024
Salt Lake City , UT , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)674
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)92
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Traditional IOCs Meet Dynamic App–Device Interactions for IoT-Specific Threat IntelligenceIEEE Internet of Things Journal10.1109/JIOT.2024.341335111:19(30571-30593)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2024
  • (2024)SmartTracer: Anomaly-Driven Provenance Analysis Based on Device Correlation in Smart Home SystemsIEEE Internet of Things Journal10.1109/JIOT.2023.330808911:4(5731-5744)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Root Cause Analysis of Anomaly in Smart Homes Through Device Interaction GraphAdvanced Intelligent Computing Technology and Applications10.1007/978-981-97-5606-3_31(363-374)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
  • (2024)An anonymous and efficient certificateless signature scheme based on blockchain in NDN‐IoT environmentsTransactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies10.1002/ett.497935:4Online publication date: 18-Apr-2024
  • (2023)Discovering adversarial driving maneuvers against autonomous vehiclesProceedings of the 32nd USENIX Conference on Security Symposium10.5555/3620237.3620403(2957-2974)Online publication date: 9-Aug-2023
  • (2023)A Formal Verification of a Reputation Multi-Factor Authentication Mechanism for Constrained Devices and Low-Power Wide-Area Network Using Temporal LogicSensors10.3390/s2315693323:15(6933)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2023
  • (2023)One Key to Rule Them All: Secure Group Pairing for Heterogeneous IoT Devices2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)10.1109/SP46215.2023.10179369(3026-3042)Online publication date: May-2023
  • (2023)IoT Anomaly Detection Via Device Interaction Graph2023 53rd Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN)10.1109/DSN58367.2023.00053(494-507)Online publication date: Jun-2023
  • (2023)Data Transparency Design in Internet of Things: A Systematic ReviewInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2023.222899740:18(5003-5025)Online publication date: 18-Jul-2023
  • (2022)Towards System-Level Security Analysis of IoT Using Attack GraphsIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing10.1109/TMC.2022.323156723:2(1142-1155)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2022

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media