Google Takes Its First Steps Toward Killing the URL
GOOGLE TAKES ITS FIRST STEPS TOWARD KILLING THE URL
AUTHOR: LILY HAY NEWMANLILY HAY NEWMAN 01.29.1906:00 PM
IN SEPTEMBER, MEMBERS of Google's Chrome security team
put forth a radical proposal: Kill off URLs as we know them. The researchers
aren't actually advocating a change to the web's underlying infrastructure.
They do, though, want to rework how browsers convey what website you're looking
at, so that you don't have to contend with increasingly long and unintelligible
URLs—and the fraud that has sprung up around them. In a talk at the Bay Area
Enigma security conference on Tuesday, Chrome usable security lead Emily Stark
is wading into the controversy, detailing Google's first steps toward more
robust website identity.
Stark emphasizes that Google isn't trying to induce chaos
by eliminating URLs. Rather, it wants to make it harder for hackers to
capitalize on user confusion about the identity of a website. Currently, the
endless haze of complicated URLs gives attackers cover for effective scams.
They can create a malicious link that seems to lead to a legitimate site, but
actually automatically redirects victims to a phishing page. Or they can design
malicious pages with URLs that look similar to real ones, hoping victims won't
notice that they're on G00gle rather than Google. With so many URL shenanigans
to combat, the Chrome team is already at work on two projects aimed at bringing
users some clarity.
"What we’re really talking about is changing the way
site identity is presented," Stark told WIRED. "People should know
easily what site they’re on, and they shouldn’t be confused into thinking
they’re on another site. It shouldn’t take advanced knowledge of how the
internet works to figure that out."
"A key challenge is to avoid flagging legitimate
domains as suspicious."
EMILY STARK, GOOGLE CHROME
The Chrome team's efforts so far focus on figuring out
how to detect URLs that seem to deviate in some way from standard practice. The
foundation for this is an open source tool called TrickURI, launching in step
with Stark's conference talk, that helps developers check that their software
is displaying URLs accurately and consistently. The goal is to give developers
something to test against so they know how URLs are going to look to users in
different situations. Separate from TrickURI, Stark and her colleagues are also
working to create warnings for Chrome users when a URL seems potentially
phishy. The alerts are still in internal testing, because the complicated part
is developing heuristics that correctly flag malicious sites without dinging
legitimate ones.*
For Google users, the first line of defense against
phishing and other online scams is still the company's Safe Browsing platform.
But the Chrome team is exploring complements to Safe Browsing that specifically
focus on flagging sketchy URLs.
GOOGLE
"Our heuristics for detecting misleading URLs
involve comparing characters that look similar to each other and domains that
vary from each other just by a small number of characters," Stark says.
"Our goal is to develop a set of heuristics that pushes attackers away
from extremely misleading URLs, and a key challenge is to avoid flagging
legitimate domains as suspicious. This is why we're launching this warning
slowly, as an experiment."
Google says it hasn't started rolling out the warnings to
the general user population while the Chrome team refines those detection
capabilities. And while URLs may not be going anywhere anytime soon, Stark
emphasizes that there is more in the works on how to get users to focus on
important parts of URLs and to refine how Chrome presents them. The big
challenge is showing people the parts of URLs that are relevant to their
security and online decision-making, while somehow filtering out all the extra
components that make URLs hard to read. Browsers also sometimes need to help
users with the opposite problem, by expanding shortened or truncated URLs.
"The whole space is really challenging because URLs
work really well for certain people and use cases right now, and lots of people
love them," Stark says. "We’re excited about the progress we’ve made
with our new open source URL-display TrickURI tool and our exploratory new
warnings on confusable URLs."
The Chrome security team has taken on internet-wide
security issues before, developing fixes for them in Chrome and then throwing
Google's weight around to motivate everyone to adopt the practice. The strategy
has been particularly successful over the past five years in stimulating a
movement toward universal adoption of HTTPS web encryption. But critics of the
approach fear the drawbacks of Chrome's power and ubiquity. The same influence
that has been used for positive change could be misdirected or abused. And with
something as foundational as URLs, critics fear that the Chrome team could land
on website identity display tactics that are good for Chrome but don't actually
benefit the rest of the web. Even seemingly minor changes to Chrome's privacy
and security posture can have major impacts on the web community.
Additionally, a trade-off of that ubiquity is being
beholden to risk-averse corporate customers. "URLs as they work now are
often unable to convey a risk level users can quickly identify," says
Katie Moussouris, founder of the responsible vulnerability disclosure firm Luta
Security. "But as Chrome grows in enterprise adoption, rather than the
consumer space, their ability to radically change visible interfaces and
underlying security architecture will be reduced by the pressure of their
customers. Great popularity comes not only with great responsibility to keep
people safe, but to minimize churn in features, usability, and backwards
compatibility."
If it all sounds like a lot of confusing and frustrating
work, that's exactly the point. The next question will be how the Chrome team's
new ideas perform in practice, and whether they really wind up making you safer
on the web.
Comments
Post a Comment