On 1 July 2013 01:55, Jacob Appelbaum <ja...@appelbaum.net> wrote:

>
> > I would like to see a tor configuration flag that sacrifices speed for
> > anonymity.
>
> You're the first person, perhaps ever, to make that feature request
> without it being in a mocking tone. At least, I think you're not mocking!
> :)
>


I would second that, it would be a desirable feature.

As it happens, I have been pondering this very problem for a while now,
even before information came to light about GCHQ's pervasive tapping of
fibre cables.  While I doubt any government agency is at the moment running
any decent traffic analysis on the Tor network - as was alluded to in
previous posts, it's hardly worth their while at the moment - conceptually
it wouldn't take a massive leap to do so.  If you have visibility of a
large proportion of the internet with very accurate time stamps, it will
almost certainly be possible to break the anonymity protection that Tor
currently provides.

There are some naive models that can combat that type of traffic analysis
but they all introduce new problems as well.  For example, if one creates a
new mode of operation so that nodes forward entire messages instead of
packets and that those messages have a lower and upper bound delay field,
it would seem on the face of it that one could thwart traffic analysis
because the data forwarding times are almost completely disassociated from
the sender.  However, because it is a larger message instead of packets, a
new statistical bias is introduced in terms of message size and reduction
in frequency of forwarding events.  So in this naive model, it may actually
have made the situation worse.

So, yes, being able to sacrifice speed for improved anonymity is a
desirable feature but I doubt it's going to be particularly easy to design
or implement.  There's also the problem of having applications that can
utilise a mode of operation that has potentially much higher latency.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Reply via email to