Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

IP geolocation databases: unreliable?

Published: 15 April 2011 Publication History

Abstract

The most widely used technique for IP geolocation consists in building a database to keep the mapping between IP blocks and a geographic location. Several databases are available and are frequently used by many services and web sites in the Internet. Contrary to widespread belief, geolocation databases are far from being as reliable as they claim. In this paper, we conduct a comparison of several current geolocation databases -both commercial and free- to have an insight of the limitations in their usability.
First, the vast majority of entries in the databases refer only to a few popular countries (e.g., U.S.). This creates an imbalance in the representation of countries across the IP blocks of the databases. Second, these entries do not reflect the original allocation of IP blocks, nor BGP announcements. In addition, we quantify the accuracy of geolocation databases on a large European ISP based on ground truth information. This is the first study using a ground truth showing that the overly fine granularity of database entries makes their accuracy worse, not better. Geolocation databases can claim country-level accuracy, but certainly not city-level.

References

[1]
B. Gueye, A. Ziviani, M. Crovella, and S. Fdida, Constraint-based geolocation of Internet hosts, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1219--1232, December 2006.
[2]
V. N. Padmanabhan and L. Subramanian, "An investigation of geographic mapping techniques for Internet hosts," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, August 2001.
[3]
E. Katz-Bassett, J. John, A. Krishnamurthy, D. Wetherall, T. Anderson, and Y. Chawathe, "Towards IP geolocation using delay and topology measurements," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM IMC Conference, October 2006.
[4]
B. Wong, I. Stoyanov, and E. G. Sirer, "Golocalization on the Internet through constraint satisfaction," in Proc. USENIX WORLDS Workshop, November 2005.
[5]
GeoURL, The GeoURL ICBM address server, http://www.geourl.org.
[6]
Net World Map, The net world map project, http://www.networldmap.com.
[7]
Host IP, My IP address lookup and geotargeting community geotarget IP project, http://www.hostip.info.
[8]
IPInfoDB, Free IP address geolocation tools, http://ipinfodb.com/.
[9]
Software 77, Free IP to country database, http://software77.net/geo-ip/.
[10]
Akamai Inc., "Akamai," http://www.akamai.com.
[11]
GeoBytes Inc., 'GeoNetMap - geobytes' IP address to geographic location database, http://www.geobytes.com/GeoNetMap.htm.
[12]
Hexasoft Development Sdn. Bhd, "IP address geolocation to identify website visitor's geographical location," http://www.ip2location.com.
[13]
Quova Inc., GeoPoint - IP geolocation experts, http://www.quova.com.
[14]
MaxMind, "Geolocation and online fraud prevention from MaxMind," http://www.maxmind.com/.
[15]
B. Gueye, S. Uhlig, and S. Fdida, "Investigating the imprecision of IP block-based geolocation," in Proc. PAM Conference, April 2007.
[16]
S. Siwpersad, B. Gueye, and S. Uhlig, "Assessing the geographic resolution of exhaustive tabulation for geolocating Internet hosts," in Proc. PAM Conference, April 2008.
[17]
M. Freedman, M. Vutukurum, N. Feamster, and H. Balakrishnan, Geographic locality of IP prefixes, in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM IMC Conference, October 2005.
[18]
I. Poese, M. A. Kaafar, B. Donnet, B. Gueye, and S. Uhlig, IP geolocation databases: Unreliable? Technische Universität Berlin, Fakultät Elektrotechnik und Informatik, Technical Report 2011-03, February 2011, see http://www.net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de/papers/PKDGU-IGDU-11.pdf.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Landmark-v6: A stable IPv6 landmark representation method based on multi-feature clusteringInformation Processing & Management10.1016/j.ipm.2024.10392162:1(103921)Online publication date: Jan-2025
  • (2024)Selection of Landmarks for Efficient Active Geolocation2024 8th Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA)10.23919/TMA62044.2024.10559002(1-9)Online publication date: 21-May-2024
  • (2024)Combating Fraudulent Participation in Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Virtual Health Research: Protocol for Increasing Data Integrity in Online Research (PRIOR)JMIR Research Protocols10.2196/5228113(e52281)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. IP geolocation databases: unreliable?

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
    ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 41, Issue 2
    April 2011
    60 pages
    ISSN:0146-4833
    DOI:10.1145/1971162
    Issue’s Table of Contents

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 15 April 2011
    Published in SIGCOMM-CCR Volume 41, Issue 2

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. accuracy
    2. geolocation
    3. reliability

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)113
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
    Reflects downloads up to 22 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2025)Landmark-v6: A stable IPv6 landmark representation method based on multi-feature clusteringInformation Processing & Management10.1016/j.ipm.2024.10392162:1(103921)Online publication date: Jan-2025
    • (2024)Selection of Landmarks for Efficient Active Geolocation2024 8th Network Traffic Measurement and Analysis Conference (TMA)10.23919/TMA62044.2024.10559002(1-9)Online publication date: 21-May-2024
    • (2024)Combating Fraudulent Participation in Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Virtual Health Research: Protocol for Increasing Data Integrity in Online Research (PRIOR)JMIR Research Protocols10.2196/5228113(e52281)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Who's in and who's out? A case study of multimodal CLIP-filtering in DataCompProceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization10.1145/3689904.3694702(1-17)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2024
    • (2024)A First Look At IPv6 Hypergiant InfrastructureProceedings of the ACM on Networking10.1145/36563002:CoNEXT2(1-25)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2024
    • (2024)A Closer Look into IPFS: Accessibility, Content, and PerformanceProceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems10.1145/36560158:2(1-31)Online publication date: 29-May-2024
    • (2024)ProbeGeo: A Comprehensive Landmark Mining Framework Based on Web ContentIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2024.342208932:5(4398-4413)Online publication date: Oct-2024
    • (2024)L3Geocast: Enabling P4-Based Customizable Network-Layer Geocast at the Network EdgeIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing10.1109/TMC.2023.334593323:8(8323-8340)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2024
    • (2024)IP Geolocation with Adversarial Probe MitigationNOMS 2024-2024 IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium10.1109/NOMS59830.2024.10575169(1-7)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
    • (2024)Do 5G Networks Achieve The Proclaimed Promises? An Empirical Study Using YouTube Edge Service2024 IEEE International Conference on Edge Computing and Communications (EDGE)10.1109/EDGE62653.2024.00014(29-34)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media