Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their "transport" lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their "transport" lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  closed
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.???
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
  worksforme |  Parent ID:
Actual Points:   |
   Points:   |
-+-
Changes (by isis):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => worksforme


Comment:

 Closing this because I no longer feel it's a good idea, for the reasons
 mentioned above.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.???
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by isis):

 Given that we're increasingly switching to PTs which are resistant to
 active-probing, perhaps we ''don't'' want to implement this (unless we
 also want to make `@type bridge-extrainfo` descriptors more or less
 unobtainable).

 Should I close this?

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:10
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.???
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final = Tor: 0.2.???


Comment:

 {{{
 15:32  nickm isis, karsten: did y'all reach consensus on #12442 ?  I'm
 hoping
to implement or defer.
 15:32  nickm Actually, I'll defer, and you can put it back in if you
 think
it's smart.
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:9
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by isis):

 Replying to [comment:4 karsten]:
  Replying to [comment:3 atagar]:
   Out of curiosity does this mean bridges will need to fetch server
 descriptors rather than microdescriptors?
 
  Bridges never fetched microdescriptors but always server descriptors.
 The bridge authority does not even generate microdescriptors for bridges.
 It's a relay-only thing.

 Right. They ''do'' have networkstatus documents, however.

  Also noting down here that atagar and I agree that `@type bridge-server-
 descriptor` in sanitized bridge server descriptors should be
 [https://collector.torproject.org/formats.html#bridge-descriptors raised
 from 1.0 to 1.1] once these descriptors include sanitized transport lines.

 Agreed as well.

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:7
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by isis):

 Replying to [comment:5 arma]:
  Replying to [comment:2 karsten]:
   I thought the bridge authority doesn't give out extra-info
 descriptors:
 
  Huh. Also it looks like bridge relays don't answer such requests either.
 So yes, this would be a new avenue for getting this transport information.

 This seems less of a problem currently, as most of the deployed transports
 are susceptible to active probing. However, in the future, when less
 active-probing susceptible transports become more widely deployed, it
 would benefit these newer transports to keep them hidden in the bridge
 extrainfo descriptors.

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:8
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1 026-deferrable
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal, bridgedb-parsers =
 tor-bridge, maybe-proposal, bridgedb-parsers 026-triaged-1
 026-deferrable


--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:6
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by arma):

 Replying to [comment:2 karsten]:
  I thought the bridge authority doesn't give out extra-info descriptors:

 Huh. Also it looks like bridge relays don't answer such requests either.
 So yes, this would be a new avenue for getting this transport information.

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:5
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by karsten):

 Replying to [ticket:12442 arma]:
  The only drawback I see is that it's a bit less secret what your
 transports are. But I think the extrainfo descriptor is served to anybody
 who asks for it, so it's not a secret now anyway from people who can fetch
 your main descriptor.

 I thought the bridge authority doesn't give out extra-info descriptors:

 https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/blob/HEAD:/src/or/directory.c#l2847

 {{{
   if (!strcmpstart(url,/tor/server/) ||
   (!options-BridgeAuthoritativeDir 
!options-BridgeRelay  !strcmpstart(url,/tor/extra/))) {
 /* ... */
   }
 }}}

 Just saying.  I don't feel strongly about whether additional transport
 lines should be kept secret from the users of a bridge.  Something for the
 PT people to decide.

  Another option is to start putting the transport line in *both* places
 for a while, so people who parse these things (e.g. Karsten) have more
 time to transition. Seems better just to identify all the people who parse
 these things, get them to prepare for it, and then just move the transport
 lines.

 The only place where I'm handling these lines is in CollecTor when
 sanitizing bridge descriptors.  I'd appreciate a heads-up of, say, 72
 hours before the bridge authority starts accepting server descriptors with
 transport lines.  For example, let me know when the patch is merged but
 before we ask Lucky to upgrade Tonga.  Thanks!

 Including transport lines in both server and extra-info descriptors is not
 necessary, IMO.  Feel free to ask on tor-dev@ if anybody else uses these
 lines.

  Then in the distant future, places like bridgedb can stop needing the
 extrainfo descriptors too.

 Making things simpler is always a good plan.

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:2
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by atagar):

  Including transport lines in both server and extra-info descriptors is
 not necessary, IMO. Feel free to ask on tor-dev@ if anybody else uses
 these lines.

 I agree that it's not necessary to duplicate the line, but should be
 proceeded by a tor-dev@ notice. The transport line is an optional value in
 extra-info descriptors, so if it simply starts being omitted then the only
 risk is that someone else (not me or Karsten) read it and start thinking
 that transports don't exist any more.

 Out of curiosity does this mean bridges will need to fetch server
 descriptors rather than microdescriptors?

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:3
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #12442 [Tor]: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not extra-info desc

[Tor Bug Tracker Wiki]

#12442: Bridges should put their transport lines in their main descriptor, not
extra-info desc
-+-
 Reporter:  arma |  Owner:
 Type:   | Status:  new
  enhancement|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
 Priority:  normal   |Version:
Component:  Tor  |   Keywords:  tor-bridge, maybe-proposal,
   Resolution:   |  bridgedb-parsers
Actual Points:   |  Parent ID:
   Points:   |
-+-

Comment (by karsten):

 Replying to [comment:3 atagar]:
  Out of curiosity does this mean bridges will need to fetch server
 descriptors rather than microdescriptors?

 Bridges never fetched microdescriptors but always server descriptors.  The
 bridge authority does not even generate microdescriptors for bridges.
 It's a relay-only thing.

 Also noting down here that atagar and I agree that `@type bridge-server-
 descriptor` in sanitized bridge server descriptors should be
 [https://collector.torproject.org/formats.html#bridge-descriptors raised
 from 1.0 to 1.1] once these descriptors include sanitized transport lines.

--
Ticket URL: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12442#comment:4
Tor Bug Tracker  Wiki https://trac.torproject.org/
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs