FYI had a chance to try NoRoot *Data* Firewall (confusingly, a separate app), and there are some parts that are a much better experience, particularly around the equivalent of "NoRoot Firewalls" global filters.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jianjia.firewall&hl=en -------------------------------------------- Q: Why is this email [hopefully] five sentences or less? | A: http://five.sentenc.es *NOTE* that my emails are delayed from arriving in my inbox until 9am daily. If urgent, please use another way of getting in touch. #slowwebmovement <http://www.musubimail.com/gmail_timer.html> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 10:13 PM, str4d <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > Marvin Arnold wrote: > > Hi all, I heard there may have already been some discussion on this > > topic but I haven't been able to find it in the archives. > > > > I'm interested in how to best use existing anonymization tools > > (Tor, I2P, etc) with client applications. The current approach > > requires users to install the anonymizer (Orbot, etc) + the client > > (Chat Secure, etc) separately. Even if there was no further > > configuration necessary, I believe this is a deal breaker for most > > people. > > I agree. This is something I thought over when I first started Bote > (how to integrate it with I2P). The conclusion I came to (based more > on instinct than numbers) was that the percentage of users who will > find the client app before the anonymizer was likely to be too large > to assume they would all be happy performing even one more out-of-app > step. Better to allow users to start using the app immediately, and > then later encourage them to install the anonymizer. > > At the same time, running multiple I2P routers on an Android device is > generally a bad idea (battery drain, data usage, connection limit > issues, memory usage, ...). Judging by other responses to this thread, > it seems similar for Tor. > > > > > Alternatives that I have heard mentioned include a) putting Orbot > > into every client that wants to use it, and b) some type of > > embedded library that makes sure only one Orbot instance is > > running per device. Of course both of these solutions risk using up > > a lot of data for users who may not have understood what they are > > downloading. > > The approach I take with Bote is to bundle an I2P router inside, but > by default only use it if I2P Android is not installed. I also provide > a setting for the user to manually specify whether they want to use > the internal router, I2P Android or a remote I2P router (e.g. on the > LAN or via a SSH tunnel). > > For interacting with I2P Android, I provide a client library that: > - - encapsulates all the I2P Java libraries necessary for client > applications > - - handles all communication between the client and I2P Android > - - provides UI helpers for detecting that I2P is installed, requesting > it be installed, or starting it > > The process of bundling the I2P router in an app is not too hard, but > I plan on creating a separate Android library that will handle it > (depending on the client lib). So apps can include the client lib, and > optionally the router lib - basically an OnionKit for I2P. > > All of the above is equivalent to your solution a) and part of b). > Detecting other apps that bundle I2P is AFAICT hard to do universally, > but if there was a mechanism established to do so then I would > definitely add it to the client library. I'm interested to know how > OnionKit plans to do this. But even without it, I would encourage app > developers to prompt users after some time that they should maybe > switch to using I2P Android, mostly for increased transparency of what > is actually going on. > > str4d > > > > > This has led me to a thought that Tor (etc), regardless of how it > > is incorporated, may be overkill for some applications. > > Specifically, my friend and I have started working on a proof of > > concept text messaging app that will use a custom mixnet to send > > SMSs. It is likely to have higher latency and be more traceable > > than a Tor based implementation, but will also consume less data > > (we are interested in starting with the US where most plans > > include unlimited SMS), extend battery life, and be a single step > > installation. > > > > I'm very interested in hearing your thoughts about the best way to > > incorporate existing anonymization tools and the merit of our > > proposed approach of a custom mixnet implementation. Ultimately it > > is a question about how to best manage privacy, usability, and > > user expectations. > > > > Marvin > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVQY+9AAoJEBO17ljAn7PgwW8P/2qIKLxQLVqN+Lx/4h8uzLNF > 90hqTuVqviY5VgQAytkSddBARyzNwlF/KueLj503NYWXQGZtPTjnn/YxGLYNjlwI > Xkc9H9HzVM6xU/R+UMq3vYJAktXYnIPqrIuvH0G7pSZuLa+KDzeMZYX4KSIDTwUa > C863CTMhtf+PZGxD+j9uIDkMBxRSBpj8BNNwfcv+hHE5d+C9O51J5B8FzSBCLBgA > cproK0qeTA81rjt9hOz7w1Tp74tXwEYNBuafVL93Fjufwrb7eNK43yVzqdVEIZRo > ykX+LoaM7VqFvrqi750u9bPAAVzMRSztKM5c7DjJxwlEzCNJX21YSqwY2a9LrGa+ > MUoVzWHWUBR+UF4LqUHUVGgm7tiwXyKzAwRRcVVxlptXLwyRW7l76bFIR5CHodZH > wWMVjn/UfQ0+/opJ28JOzzt2LnhC68AR6oi3dlNHVBpZAjDhXhrdxGQ1VDTHubNz > V2KAit8PsXHXicYJGYNXW3t5Q38N/NdZWsbF4Na0cTLo3sRfzPd0VyOh6WvRuUPZ > tKBkObS1NHeYtFG4j0OskUh5+HV+OafGqt96nWGTYEXOQbIKccrnDXgzz+Le11kr > z6CqvZZ82MQo6zC/l3jfjTsxcAm28MmOh350vf5L69FvLIZ++lmkSfxrViNeAi8/ > npxcHP8ZqMd9NtB7ZMIH > =dFlM > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev > To unsubscribe, email: [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/guardian-dev To unsubscribe, email: [email protected]
