{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02040816326530612, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.133928571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Rethinking about guessing attacks

Although various past efforts have been made to characterize and detect guessing attacks, there is no consensus on the definition of guessing attacks. Such a lack of generic definition makes it extremely difficult to evaluate the resilience of security protocols to guessing attacks.
 To overcome this hurdle, we seek a new definition in this paper to fully characterize the attacker's guessing capabilities (i.e., guessability). This provides a general framework to reason about guessing attacks in a symbolic setting, independent of specific intruder models. We show how the framework can be used to analyze both passive and active guessing attacks.