De-Anonymizing Web Communities with Gravatar

http://rgov.org/2010/11/27/gravatar/

by wickedchicken • 16 years ago

70 24 16 years ago

il• 16 years ago

There was a post here a while back by someone who did the same thing with the Stackoverflow data dump. I think he was able to recover about 10% of users' emails from a vastly larger search space.

Moral of the story: simply hashing emails is not enough if you're going to display them publicly. It's trivial to use a salt and prevent such an attack.

duskwuff• 16 years ago

I believe the mechanics of Gravatar make salting impossible, though. The whole system works because there's a single hash for any given author email address.

warp• 16 years ago

Indeed. A work-around would be to fetch the gravatars in the backend and serve them yourself, that way you will not have to expose the hash.

teaspoon• 16 years ago

Yep. The salt would have to public, which would defeat the purpose.

However, a user can protect herself by "salting" her own email with an address tag. For example, provide tom+ES85jFxz@rpi.edu as your address instead of tom@rpi.edu.

extension• 16 years ago

Release a new API that uses symmetric encryption instead of a one way hash. Use however many rounds are necessary to prevent brute force attacks. Gravatar keeps a list of generated keys, but not who generated them. The API accepts a key ID and encrypted email. That makes the keys convenient to generate and change. Deprecate the old API and turn it off some day.

I think that works, but I try not to think about crypto at three in the morning, or at all really.

EDIT: Also, a consumer site could implement this themselves with a simple proxy server. They could even open up the service to other sites.

to4• 16 years ago

you still have the problem that the thumbnail stays the same. if you change the url you could just hash the thumbnail binary content... pixel colors or whatever you want to use. its still no help to jzst change the user id.

mike-cardwell• 16 years ago

Not really. The people you are de-anonymising are those who are not using gravatar, so whilst they all have different MD5's for their email addresses at the moment, they all have the same placeholder image.

steveklabnik3• 16 years ago

One of the best aspects of gravatar is that fact that it takes one line of code to implement:

    "http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/#{MD5::md5(email.downcase)}"

If it wasn't that easy, I'd probably consider just doing something else. Maybe just have it use a stronger hashing algo?

Estragon• 16 years ago

  ...have it use a stronger hashing algo?

The strength of the hashing algorithm is ancillary to this vulnerability. The OP was able to resolve the emails because they had a predictable format.

to4• 16 years ago

thats funny... i still have an email from probably 2006 telling gravatar that a single md5 for each user (email address) is just idiotic for many reasons. possible collisions, anonymity, and so on. they replied back within an hour that im wrong, that there is no risk of collision because every email is unique because its the primary key (dah?) and they will continue using it.

made me laugh. since then i ignored the service as they are obvious just a bunch of script kiddies.

to be honest - the only obsticle for such a service is server redundancy. nothing special about it. besides that its now a obsolete service since every major site offers oauth.

studer• 16 years ago

Given your statement on MD5 collisions, it's not entirely clear to me who's the script kiddie here.

to4• 16 years ago

how many users do they want to store in their db with a unique md5 string? its just a really bad bet. thats a script kiddie for me, assuming that a hash never collides within a database and than chosing md5. there are better, even very simple, ways to store hashes without forcing collisions.

wladimir• 16 years ago

Agreed -- It was also my first thought when I read about the service. It's easy to make a database of md5 hashes and link the comments to that, no reason to even decode them. There goes anonymity. This article is only new in that it is (afaik) the first person that actually bothers to test it out and publicize about it.

abraham• 16 years ago

A commenting system that still shows user specific avatars next to anonymous comments? That sounds like a terrible implementation.

De-Anonymizing Web Communities with Gravatar

Related Stories