GFW exhibits three confirmed HTTP analysis gaps: it inspects only the first Request-URI and Host header in HTTP-pipelined requests (HTTP3), will not scan beyond 2,048 bytes into a Request-URI (HTTP2), and recognizes only standard percent-encoding while ignoring alternative URI encodings such as overlong UTF-8 (HTTP4). The authors classify all three as low-difficulty fixes for the censor, meaning they may be patched quickly once disclosed.
From 2013-khattak-towards — Towards Illuminating a Censorship Monitor's Model to Facilitate Evasion
· §5, Table 1 (HTTP2, HTTP3, HTTP4)
· 2013
· Free and Open Communications on the Internet
Implications
Place sensitive domain names or keywords in pipelined HTTP requests beyond the first, or encode them with non-percent URI encoding schemes; both yield confirmed GFW evasion under 2013 measurement conditions but should be treated as fragile given the low fix cost.
When constructing HTTP-based circumvention channels, push identifying content past byte offset 2048 in the URI as a low-overhead obfuscation layer, while layering stronger defenses for long-term resilience.