LazyTAP: On-Demand Data Minimization for Trigger-Action Applications
Mohammad M. Ahmadpanah, Daniel Hedin, Andrei Sabelfeld
Abstract
Trigger-Action Platforms (TAPs) empower applications (apps) for connecting otherwise unconnected devices and services. The current TAPs like IFTTT require trigger services to push excessive amounts of sensitive data to the TAP regardless of whether the data will be used in the app, at odds with the principle of data minimization. Furthermore, the rich features of modern TAPs, including IFTTT queries to support multiple trigger services and nondeterminism of apps, have been out of the reach of previous data minimization approaches like minTAP. This paper proposes LazyTAP, a new paradigm for fine-grained on-demand data minimization. LazyTAP breaks away from the traditional push-all approach of coarse-grained data over-approximation. Instead, LazyTAP pulls input data on-demand, once it is accessed by the app execution. Thanks to the fine granularity, LazyTAP enables tight minimization that naturally generalizes to support multiple trigger services via queries and is robust with respect to nondeterministic behavior of the apps. We achieve seamlessness for third-party app developers by leveraging laziness to defer computation and proxy objects to load necessary remote data behind the scenes as it becomes needed. We formally establish the correctness of LazyTAP and its minimization properties with respect to both IFTTT and minTAP. We implement and evaluate LazyTAP on app benchmarks showing that on average LazyTAP improves minimization by 95% over IFTTT and by 38% over minTAP, while incurring a tolerable performance overhead.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext cb6dad81-5040-4a74-b7c3-83c1db57daf7Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on9
- Foreshadow: Extracting the Keys to the Intel SGX Kingdom with Transient Out-of-Order ExecutionJo Van Bulck, Marina Minkin, Ofir Weisse, Daniel Genkin et al.USENIX Security 2018 · 1,175 citations
- Plundervolt: Software-based Fault Injection Attacks against Intel SGXKit Murdock, David F. Oswald, Flavio D. Garcia, Jo Van Bulck et al.S&P 2020 · 369 citations
- Charting the Attack Surface of Trigger-Action IoT PlatformsQi Wang, Pubali Datta, Wei Yang, Si Liu et al.CCS 2019 · 162 citations
- If This Then What?: Controlling Flows in IoT AppsIulia Bastys, Musard Balliu, Andrei SabelfeldCCS 2018 · 119 citations
- Scalable analysis of interaction threats in IoT systemsMohannad Alhanahnah, Clay Stevens, Hamid BagheriISSTA 2020 · 63 citations
Related papers
- Practical Data Access Minimization in Trigger-Action PlatformsYunang Chen, Mohannad Alhanahnah, Andrei Sabelfeld, Rahul Chatterjee et al.USENIX Security 2022
- Data Privacy in Trigger-Action SystemsYunang Chen, Amrita Roy Chowdhury, Ruizhe Wang, Andrei Sabelfeld et al.S&P 2021 · 22 citations
- SandTrap: Securing JavaScript-driven Trigger-Action PlatformsMohammad M. Ahmadpanah, Daniel Hedin, Musard Balliu, Lars Eric Olsson et al.USENIX Security 2021 · 31 citations
- Decentralized Action Integrity for Trigger-Action IoT PlatformsEarlence Fernandes, Amir Rahmati, Jaeyeon Jung, Atul PrakashNDSS 2018 · 14 citations
- Architecting Trigger-Action Platforms for Security, Performance and FunctionalityDeepak Sirone Jegan, Michael M. Swift, Earlence FernandesNDSS 2024
