Cited by 204Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G

Unexpected means of protocol inference

Ma, Justin, Levchenko, Kirill, Kreibich, Christian, Savage, Stefan, Voelker, Geoffrey M.·2006·Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement

Abstract

Network managers are inevitably called upon to associate network traffic with particular applications. Indeed, this operation is critical for a wide range of management functions ranging from debugging and security to analytics and policy support. Traditionally, managers have relied on application adherence to a well established global port mapping: Web traffic on port 80, mail traffic on port 25 and so on. However, a range of factors - including firewall port blocking, tunneling, dynamic port allocation, and a bloom of new distributed applications - has weakened the value of this approach. We analyze three alternative mechanisms using statistical and structural content models for automatically identifying traffic that uses the same application-layer protocol, relying solely on flow content. In this manner, known applications may be identified regardless of port number, while traffic from one unknown application will be identified as distinct from another. We evaluate each mechanism's classification performance using real-world traffic traces from multiple sites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1177080.1177123

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ma, J., Levchenko, K., Kreibich, C., Savage, S., & Voelker, G. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
Publisher
ACM
Published
2006-10-25
Pages
313-326
OpenAlex
W2148346742
Cited by
204
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 17
FWCI
11.50
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software-Defined Networks and 5G
Keywords
network traffic classification, structural-content model, port mapping, tunneling, network management, traffic traces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review