DEFENSES
dns-tunneling DNS tunneling
Synonyms: DNSTT, iodine
9 papers on file
- 2025-iran-shutdown-measurement Characterizing Iran's Phased National Internet Shutdown in 2025: A Progressive and Distributed Action
- 2026-cawthon-fountain-codes-censorship Fountain codes in censorship circumvention rendezvous
- 2026-gusgustavo-iran-internet-shutdown Iran: Internet shutdown from 7 UTC 28 February 2026
- 2026-tuleo1-internet-analysis-shutdown Internet analysis in the shutdown in iran
- 2025-miaan-stealth-blackout Iran's Stealth Blackout: A Multi-stakeholder Analysis of the June 2025 Internet Shutdown
- 2023-gfw-blocking-1111 The blocking of 1.1.1.1 in China, starting from 2023-10-01
- 2014-wachs-censorship-resistant A Censorship-Resistant, Privacy-Enhancing and Fully Decentralized Name System
- 2013-wachs-feasibility On the Feasibility of a Censorship Resistant Decentralized Name System
- 2012-lincoln-bootstrapping Bootstrapping Communications into an Anti-Censorship System
22 findings tagged here
-
Encrypted DNS has attractive anti-blocking properties for circumvention rendezvous, but its constraint of conveying only small amounts of data per message makes it difficult to use as a generic data-exchange channel. Fountain codes offer an uncomplicated way to transmit discrete, bounded-length messages over such channels, including those that are unordered or unreliable.
-
Fountain codes (rateless erasure codes) break a message into many small, specially encoded pieces that can be reconstructed from any sufficient subset, making them well-suited to covert channels that are lossy, unordered, or bandwidth-constrained — properties common to DNS-based rendezvous channels.
-
Drawing on the Collage and Assemblage censorship-circumvention systems — which use fountain codes in conjunction with steganography — this work narrows focus to the rendezvous step alone, treating fountain codes as a standalone design component useful independently of steganographic cover channels.
-
A proof-of-concept implementation over UDP demonstrates the essential elements of fountain-code–based rendezvous: breaking a message into pieces, transmitting them over a lossy channel, and reconstructing them at the receiver. The authors also work out a prospective design for rendezvous over encrypted DNS.
-
During Iran's near-complete February 2026 shutdown, DNS-based tunneling (dnstt over UDP port 53) was identified by the community as the only functioning circumvention method, with participants successfully sharing public dnstt server configurations to maintain connectivity.
-
FreeUp achieves 86.68% AUC on CIC-IoT2023, 85.44% AUC on DoHBrw2020 (malicious DNS-over-HTTPS tunneling), and 95.53% AUC / 93.22% F1 on ISCX-Tor2016 (Tor anonymous traffic), outperforming all nine baselines by more than 3% AUC on the first two datasets. The ISCX-Tor2016 result demonstrates that frequency-decoupled ML classifiers can detect Tor-like anonymous traffic with high confidence under zero-positive (unsupervised) training.
-
FreeUp operates under a zero-positive (unsupervised) learning paradigm — trained exclusively on normal traffic with no labeled anomaly examples — yet achieves 95.53% AUC on Tor traffic and 85.44% AUC on DNS-over-HTTPS tunneling detection. This demonstrates that frequency-aware anomaly detectors generalize to novel circumvention protocols without requiring any labeled attack data, eliminating the labeling bottleneck that previously limited ML-based censorship detection.
-
ESPRESSO achieves only TPR 0.132 at FPR ≤ 10⁻³ in network-mode for DNS-tunneled traffic—near chance—compared to TPR 0.992 for SSH traffic at the same threshold. The paper attributes this to the polling-based communication mechanism of dnscat2, which disrupts the timing patterns that interval-based flow correlation relies on.
-
DNS tunneling operated for 'at most a week or two' before Iran blocked all external DNS resolvers and forced traffic to local DNS providers. The local DNS infrastructure was effectively unusable as a tunneling substrate: maximum throughput was ~100 kb/s and connections were reliably severed around the 1-minute mark.
-
Neither China nor Iran directly block ECH ClientHello messages; instead both effectively prevent ECH by censoring encrypted DNS resolvers. China blocks Cloudflare's DoH/DoT resolver (mozilla.cloudflare-dns.com) via SNI-based blocking in TLS and QUIC, causing residual censorship of up to 360 and 180 seconds respectively. Iran blocks both Cloudflare and NextDNS DoH hostnames via DNS block-page injection, TLS TCP RST, and HTTP block pages. Iran cannot analyze QUIC, so DoQ is uncensored and enables ECH in Iran. China's NextDNS IP blackholing affected only one of two resolved IPs, leaving an uncensored path.
-
For the Isolation Forest model, resolver ASN (SHAP importance 0.237) and probe ASN (0.220) are the two most predictive features for DNS tampering, reflecting that censorship is topologically concentrated at specific network vantage points. For XGBoost, headers_match dominates (0.317), followed by asn_control_match (0.177), indicating that supervised models rely more on cross-layer consistency signals. DNS tampering represents only 0.5–0.8% of all OONI measurements across 2022–2023 (Figure 2), creating severe class imbalance in any training set.
-
The authors implement a system that identifies correct IP addresses of blocked domains inside a censored network by exploiting the predictable characteristics of forged IPs returned by GFW DNS filtering devices. The system achieves 100% accuracy in identifying valid IPs within a short time period, using 1.7 billion DNS records collected over 40 days across 86,876 resolvers.
-
China's Great Firewall runs three independent DNS censorship injectors in parallel; elevating the DNS qdcount field to 2 (despite only one query being present, violating RFC 1035) evades all three injectors simultaneously with 100% success rate across 1,000 trials — but only Cloudflare (1.1.1.1) among eight tested open resolvers responds to such queries. DNS compression paired with an elevated qdcount also achieves 100% evasion of all three injectors but is supported only by Cloudflare and Google (8.8.8.8).
-
The dnstt DNS-over-HTTPS tunnel, built on a KCP Turbo Tunnel session layer, achieved download speeds of 130 KB/s using Google and Cloudflare DoH resolvers and 30 KB/s using Quad9, compared to iodine's maximum of 2 KB/s over the same operators' UDP DNS resolvers — a 15–65× improvement. DNS-over-HTTPS hides message contents from the censor, removing the two main classical DNS tunnel detection vectors: unusual DNS message structure and plaintext tunnel domain names in queries.
-
DNS-sly encodes downstream data by selecting A records from the IP address pool of CDN-hosted domains. For the top 25% of Alexa Top 500 domains, approximately one third of DNS responses contain more than 8 A records and ~15% contain 15 A records; the global IP pool has a median of ~2,000 IPs per domain (maximum ~16,000), enabling b = floor(log2(s!/(s-c)!)) bits per response.
-
DNS-sly achieves downstream throughput of up to 600 bytes of hidden data per web page click, with a median of ~100 bytes/click using a global IP map and ~75 bytes/click using a local IP map (a 25% difference despite vastly different IP set sizes). A 4 KB file transfer completes in 30 clicks with the global profile map and 64 clicks with the local map.
-
DNS-sly requires out-of-band distribution of a 2.3 MB compressed bootstrap package (user profile map) before covert communication begins. The authors explicitly reject automated in-band bootstrapping to preserve deniability, accepting a hard scalability constraint as the cost; the particular censored environment tested did not interfere with DNS traffic at all, enabling successful censored-site retrieval at the same throughput rates as uncensored tests.
-
Active probing resistance was evaluated by simultaneously querying 5 additional DNS resolvers for every domain during DNS-sly operation. DNS-sly's response change distribution falls within one standard deviation of the other resolvers, making probing attacks unable to distinguish DNS-sly servers from ordinary resolvers. TTL-based re-encoding prohibition neutralizes forced-divergence probing where an attacker sends repeated identical queries to expose responder state.
-
DNS-sly achieves statistical deniability by profiling each user's organic DNS behavior — recording accessed domains, semantic topics, and resolver-specific IP addresses — and constructing upstream requests that semantically overlap with that profile. Upstream communication is indistinguishable from normal DNS traffic in volume, frequency, and semantics; all DNS headers are fully legitimate with no unusual record types.
-
GhostPost's client-server coordination channel transfers only metadata and small text payloads, making it neither bandwidth-intensive nor latency-sensitive. The paper explicitly concludes that 'practically any means of communication, including low-performance covert channels, are adequate' for the coordination channel, enabling operation over DNS tunnels, steganographic channels, or other constrained transports when the central server's HTTPS endpoint is blocked.
-
Probing ~150,000 open DNS resolvers inside China over two weeks found that more than 99.85% provided polluted answers for blocked domains. The small fraction of clean resolvers achieved this by forwarding queries to Google Public DNS or OpenDNS via uncensored tunnels, or by locally dropping responses containing known GFW 'Bad IP' addresses (174 identified IPs).
-
Because the GFW injects forged DNS responses rather than dropping the original query packet, the legitimate response from the upstream DNS server may still arrive after the injected forgery. The authors propose two circumvention strategies: querying on a non-standard port to bypass the port-53-only injection filter, or issuing standard-port queries and selectively discarding responses matching the known bad-IP pool to recover the authentic answer.