Padding-only defenses that inject bursty traffic cause severe additional delay under realistic network bottlenecks: Break-Pad's delay overhead increases from 0% to 332.6% and FRONT's from 0% to 111.2% under a per-trace simulated PPS bottleneck. Even ephemeral padding defenses induce 43.9% delay overhead under bottleneck conditions, compared to 0% without a bottleneck, due to congestion from dummy packets.

Ephemeral defenses were integrated with a WireGuard fork and deployed as Mullvad VPN's 'DAITA' (Defense Against AI-guided Traffic Analysis) opt-in feature across Android, iOS, macOS, Linux, and Windows for over one year, serving a growing number of thousands of daily users. Individual defenses are derived deterministically from seeds in 43.6 ± 4.7 ms on a commodity laptop, making per-connection unique defenses practical at VPN scale.

§1, §7 deployment

Ephemeral blocking defenses reduce DF accuracy from 89.0% (undefended) to 10.2% and RF from 90.1% to 14.7% with standard 30-epoch training, at 97.5% bandwidth and 68.4% delay overhead; under infinite training, DF rises to only 29.2% and RF to 24.3%, still far below undefended baselines of 92.7% and 94.7%. Defenses are tunable at deployment time by adjusting Maybenot framework-wide limits, enabling overhead-vs-protection trade-offs without redeployment.

§5.2, §5.3, Table 1, Table 2 defense

The ephemeral property — using a unique seed-derived defense per connection — prevents attackers from training classifiers on the exact deployed defense variant. Stacked combinations with height H=5 from N=1,000 base defenses yield 6.88×10^25 unique defenses (polynomial growth O(N^{2H})). Attacks trained on ephemeral defenses also generalize significantly better across other randomized defense families than attacks trained on static defenses.

§3.3, §5.4 defense

With infinite training time, Laserbeak achieves 93.5%, 95.9%, and 95.9% accuracy against ephemeral padding, FRONT, and Interspace respectively, compared to 96.5% undefended — confirming that padding-only defenses provide no meaningful protection against a sufficiently trained deep-learning WF adversary. Only ephemeral blocking defenses retain measurable protection, reducing Laserbeak to 71.8% accuracy under infinite training versus 96.5% undefended.

§5.3, Table 2 evaluation

NATA (Non-invasive Active Traffic-correlation Analysis) injects low-frequency bandwidth waveforms (sinusoidal, square-wave, triangular) into Tor TCP connections at an upstream gateway without endpoint compromise, payload decryption, or Tor-browser modification. BM-Net, a selective state-space classifier trained on the exit-side observations, achieves a 99.65% binary detection F1 score distinguishing watermarked from natural traffic on a 20,000-trace real-world dataset.

2026-fan-activeflowmark-assessing-tor §IV, §VI.D, Table III flow-correlationtraffic-shapeml-classifier

BM-Net achieves a 99.65% binary detection F1 score for distinguishing bandwidth-watermarked Tor flows from natural traffic, outperforming all evaluated baselines (next best: TikTok at 75.96% F1). The accuracy gap stems from active perturbation imposing a deterministic low-frequency throughput constraint rather than relying on subtle natural metadata, making the detection task fundamentally easier than passive website fingerprinting.

2026-fan-activeflowmark-assessing-tor §VI-D, Table III–IV flow-correlationtraffic-shapeml-classifier

BM-Net achieves a 99.65% binary detection F1 score distinguishing watermarked from natural Tor flows, and a 97.5% macro-F1 score for fine-grained modulation classification across sinusoidal, square-wave, and triangular patterns. The fine-grained test set contains 201 held-out samples collected from ten clients across five geographic regions (Europe, North America, Australia, Southeast Asia, East Asia), with training traces including traffic collected under WTF-PAD and Walkie-Talkie defenses.

2026-fan-activeflowmark-assessing-tor §VI-D, Table III, Table V flow-correlationml-classifiertraffic-shape

BM-Net achieves a 97.5% macro-F1 score for fine-grained classification of three modulation geometries (sinusoidal, square-wave, triangular) from noisy exit-side Tor observations using only 201 labeled test samples collected across cross-continental Tor paths. Residual errors concentrate between natural traffic and square-wave modulation, as abrupt low-rate transitions are partially smoothed by Tor multiplexing and network jitter.

2026-fan-activeflowmark-assessing-tor §VI-D, Table V flow-correlationml-classifiertraffic-shape

Fine-grained modulation classification (natural vs. sinusoidal vs. square-wave vs. triangular) achieves 97.5% macro-F1 on a 201-sample held-out test set. Square-wave waveforms are the hardest class (F1 = 95.7%), while sinusoidal and triangular each reach 99.0% F1, because abrupt square-wave transitions are partially smoothed by Tor multiplexing and network dynamics.

2026-fan-activeflowmark-assessing-tor §VI.D.2, Table V flow-correlationtraffic-shapeml-classifier

The host-profiling censor (passive traffic analysis: count connections per server, block those exceeding a threshold τ within a window w) blocks essentially all circumvention user traffic within 30 time steps for all classifier qualities tested (ρ_TP ∈ {0.9, 0.95, 0.99}), while causing far less collateral damage than zig-zag (never exceeding ~30% innocent server blocking). Snowflake resists this attack well: with w=3, τ=3, over 94.48% of users receive a proxy within 2 steps even with worst-classifier rules, and final unblocked server rates are 91.24–99.04%. The host profiling approach is feasible for passive censors who cannot enumerate the distribution channel.

2026-fares-game §5.2, Table 2, Table 3 traffic-shapeml-classifier