-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Michael Rogers wrote: > On 14/11/14 21:23, Nathan of Guardian wrote: >> Otherwise, I am all about HIGH-latency anonymity systems these >> days, so the more we can think about mobile messaging over Tor as >> a transport for all things, the better! > > I totally agree about the value of high-latency anonymity systems, > and unsurprisingly I also agree that messaging over Tor is a good > idea, but I think we should devote some time to working out how the > two things fit together - maybe try to get the Tor research > community interested. > > If we simply use Tor as a low-latency transport for asynchronous > messaging then we're limited to Tor's threat model, i.e. we can't > prevent traffic confirmation attacks. If we revive one of the > remailers or build a new system then we're limited to a small > number of users, i.e. a small anonymity set. So ideally we'd find > some way of adding high-latency mix-like features to Tor.
I2P-Bote (high-latency distributed encrypted email) [0] falls into the "new system" category (even though it has existed for 5 years). But I am intrigued by this thought. I2P-Bote was designed to use I2P to hide the fact that someone was using I2P-Bote (up to the limit of traffic confirmation), but it also includes its own high-latency relaying system for sending mail. Are you suggesting that its efficacy is reduced by it running over I2P (compared to not running over an anonymizing network at all)? > > Done right, this could provide a large anonymity set for the > high-latency users and improve the traffic analysis resistance of > Tor for the low-latency users at the same time, by providing a pool > of latency-insensitive traffic to smooth out the bursty > low-latency traffic between relays. The I2P tunnel specification has included support for high-latency tunnels since it was designed. None of it is implemented yet because no one had a use for it, but the underlying tunnel protocol has defined message bits for supporting user-defined delays both along a tunnel [1] and at the end of it [2]. If high-latency tunnels would actually be useful, we can implement them and get most of the network supporting delays relatively quickly (we usually have 80% of the network on the latest release within six weeks). str4d [0] http://i2pbote.i2p.rocks/ [1] https://geti2p.net/en/docs/spec/tunnel-message (search "Delay) [2] https://geti2p.net/en/docs/spec/i2np#struct_DeliveryInstructions > > Cheers, Michael _______________________________________________ > Guardian-dev mailing list > > Post: [email protected] List info: > https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev > > To Unsubscribe Send email to: > [email protected] Or visit: > https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/guardian-dev/str4d%40i2pmail.org > > You are subscribed as: [email protected] > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUbk6tAAoJEIA97kkaNHPnZLkP/jY/YECsWZ3IcOgFPbVYl5Jd U+LJdowQCJJ8ud8kvcxl0Xx5Q7GOOMznJUitxtdjtXmpyX3FhfkWMrB9yKxQTzvS wXnVIdn5vj7oTTxvI/a5uWJu3EzX3JRj91/CSXI2CNi0ZjlieocHGx3o1jFubROf jyKoY/kEe6T1cWvvXXmibTfxIL4IamYVsZrowLSs4hg9PXesmJAobl/r+32777hm rBJgUSbcMvD6c8z9sHIBk8L0Hs+m9z+odYxzAboln6jSbT5kpjC8v+DzX4FhFeM9 pRIveEPji2AhBMWR3nZIH+7KNoqp3eN7D7g9R7IL0HVqkcZCrMl61Odo+K04j8tG hiPlcWQ05R8Y42N6CMRXi9A7v8lBQGhITHr9swHERSC269Fu3UKfeEMuqU2W+oqS RW3chf00n0VmzqOuuRuftxiImGJoz5e88xS3zsKCXDqhkOyWSOxF/k640cKVs7tQ GxN7qoA+P7vAdD8d8eMEq+ghZ0ICwF3rzTEvtrKmhh3qKTOEU3yAUt3q7dxB1caP NkVHA9f2GeHIVsflU+94R6mNINuAH/bDz+mMwu0s54MVDaA+kbx2TqgTqECS62XN w4k+SwW5cd14VQHqFJ+zVimbig0kTAUL4P98wecfLxgyHa3FxvFvejCkONOSjbnO qBqwLBbRL7JUa5O5iT7u =kqdi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Guardian-dev mailing list Post: [email protected] List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To Unsubscribe Send email to: [email protected] Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/guardian-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com You are subscribed as: [email protected]
