Cited by 47Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionSpam and Phishing Detection

Digging into HTTPS: flow-based classification of webmail traffic

Schatzmann, Dominik, Mühlbauer, Wolfgang, Spyropoulos, Thrasyvoulos, Dimitropoulos, Xenofontas·2010·Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement

Abstract

Recently, webmail interfaces, e.g., Horde, Outlook Web Access, and webmail platforms such as GMail, Yahoo!, and Hotmail have seen a tremendous boost in popularity. Given the importance of e-mail for personal and business use alike, and its exposure to imminent threats, there exists the need for a comprehensive view of the Internet mail system, including webmail traffic. We, in this paper, propose a novel, passive approach to identify webmail traffic solely based on network-level data in order to obtain a comprehensive view of the mail system. Key to our approach is that we leverage correlations across protocols and time to introduce three novel features for HTTPS webmail classification. Our first feature is based on the finding that webmail servers tend to reside close to legacy mail servers, e.g. IMAP and POP, which can be easily identified. Our second feature leverages that the usage of webmail services results in distinct patterns on sessions' duration and on the diurnal/weekly traffic usage profile. In addition, our third feature exploits the observation that traffic flows to webmail platforms exhibit inherent periodicities due to the fact that AJAX-based clients periodically check for new messages. We use these three features to build a simple classifier and detect webmail traffic on real-world NetFlow traces from a medium-sized backbone network. We believe that the major contribution of this paper -- exploring a set of new features that could classify applications that run over HTTPS ports solely based on NetFlow data -- will stimulate more general advance in the field of traffic classification.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1879141.1879184

Cites

26 of 26 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
Schatzmann, D., Mühlbauer, W., Spyropoulos, T., & Dimitropoulos, X.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
Publisher
ACM
Published
2010-11
Pages
322-327
OpenAlex
W2137219488
Cited by
47
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.88
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 › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
Keywords
NetFlow, passive network monitoring, network traffic classification, diurnal traffic patterns

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